Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2016  with  funding  from 
Getty  Research  Institute 


https://archive.org/details/historyofwoodengOOIint 


.... 


\ 


RETURNING  FROM  THE  BOAR-HUNT. 


THE  HISTORY 


OF 

WOOD-ENGRAVING 

IN  AMERICA 


BY 

W.  J.  LINTON 


BOSTON:  ESTES  AND  LAURIAT 

18S2 


£ c/ction  /nrutet/  to  / 000  namt/erec/  a?ic/  2d  /ettcrec/  (^'otuei 

&ac/i  co^i y aiyynect. 


Q/K. 


Copyright,  1881,  by  Estes  and  Lauriat. 


University  Press: 

John  Wilson  and  Son,  Cambridge. 


THE  HISTORY 

OF 


WOOD-ENGRAVING  IN  AMERICA. 


I 


ADVERTISEMENT 


THE  following  pages,  with  the  exception  of  the  last  chapter,  were  written  for 
the  American  Art  Review,  appearing  consecutively  in  Nos.  5 to  12,  in 
1880.  The  date  should  be  borne  in  mind  as  marking  the  limit  of  my 
History.  Already  I have  to  add  the  death  (duly  chronicled  in  the  Art  Review) 
of  Mr.  Adams,  occurring  on  the  1 6th  of  September,  1880,  at  the  house  of  his 
nephew,  Mr.  James  S.  Adams,  at  Morristown,  New  Jersey:  within  but  a few  days 
after  I had  the  pleasure  of  hearing  from  his  own  lips  his  satisfaction  at  the  account 
I have  given  of  his  life  and  works.  That  he  should  have  lived  and  died  almost 
unregarded,  even  the  National  Academy  of  Design  withholding  from  him  the  full 
dignity  of  Academician,  may  be  partly  accounted  for  by  his  long  abandonment  of 
his  practice  as  an  artist  and  by  his  general  retiring  habits.  Of  him  dead,  as  of 
him  living,  I can  only  repeat  that  he  was  the  ablest  and  best  of  American  wood- 
engravers. 

Mr.  Barber,  of  whom  I wrote  (page  11)  as  in  his  eighty-third  year,  is  still  to  be 
seen  about  New  Haven,  and  since  my  writing  has  brought  out  another  of  his  curi- 
ous volumes,  — AEsop's  Fables , with  Bible  references,  and  with  numerous  illustrations 
by  his  own  hand. 

Two  corrections  have  to  be  made.  At  page  33  I spoke  of  Miss  Cogswell  as 
Superintendent  of  the  School  of  Engraving  for  Women  at  the  Cooper  Institute. 
The  present  Superintendent  is  Mr.  John  P.  Davis,  under  whose  able  management,  I 
have  authority  for  reporting,  the  efficiency  of  the  School  has  been  greatly  increased. 
The  Pioneers  in  the  Settlement  of  America  (Estes  & Lauriat),  page  43,  was  brought 
out  under  the  direction,  not  of  the  late  Mr.  John  Andrew,  but  of  his  so*n,  Mr. 
George  T.  Andrew.  My  misstatement  arose  from  the  retention  of  the  old  business 
style  of  “John  Andrew  & Son.” 

Besides  the  new  chapter,  thirteen  full-page  engravings  are  added  to  the  present 
publication,  principally  from  the  American  Art  Review.  For  the  loan  of  two  — the 
God  of  Wine  and  the  River  God — I have  especially  to  thank  the  courtesy  of  Messrs. 
Appleton,  - for  whose  Art  Journal  they  were  engraved.  I have  already  expressed 
my  thanks  for  generous  help  from  other  quarters. 

W.  J.  Linton. 

New  Haven,  Conn.,  August,  1881. 


CONTENTS 


Dr.  Anderson 


CHAPTER  I 

Page 

I 


CHAPTER  II 

Lansing  — Morgan  — Dearborn  — Bowen  — Mason  — Barber  — Adams 


io 


CHAPTER  III 

The  Hieroglyphick  Bible  — Hall  — Croome  — Devereux  — Mallory  — Crossman  — American  Engrav- 
ing and  Printing  Co.  — American  Magazine  — A.  J.  Mason  of  London  — Early  State  of  the 
Art  — American  Tract  Society  — Childs  — W hitney  — Irving’s  Sketch  Book  — Knickerbocker’s 
History  of  New  York  — Life  of  Napoleon  — Chapman’s  Drawing-Book 17 


CHAPTER  IV 

Illustrated  Newspapers  and  Magazines  — Harper’s  New  Monthly  — Strong’s  Illustrated  American 
News — Diogenes  — Yankee  Notions  — Frank  Leslie’s  Illustrated  Newspaper  — Harper’s  Weekly 
Journal  of  Civilization  — American  Enterprise  — Every  Saturday  — Our  Young  Folks  — River- 
side Magazine  — Scribner’s  Magazine  — The  Aldine  — Engraving  School  for  Women 27 

CHAPTER  V 

Marsh’s  Insects  Injurious  to  Vegetation  — Gift  Books  — Bitter-Sweet — Folk  Songs  — Anthony  — 
Enoch  Arden  — Vision  of  Sir  Launfal  — Locksley  Hall  — Snow-Bound  — Christmas  Carol  — 
Winter  Poems  — Edwin  Booth  — Mabel  Martin  — Skeleton  in  Armor  — Hanging  of  the  Crane 

— Scarlet  Letter  — Kathrina  — Lady  Geraldine  — Women  of  the  Bible  — Song  of  the  Sower 

— Story  of  the  Fountain  — Little  People  in  the  Snow  — A Midsummer  Night’s  Dream  — 

Picturesque  America — Picturesque  Europe 34 


CHAPTER  VI 

Harper’s  and  Scribner’s  Magazines  — St.  Nicholas  — Appleton’s  Art  Journal  — American  Painters  — 
Landscape  in  American  Poetry  — A Century  After  — Pioneers  in  the  Settlement  of  America  — 
Harper’s  Weekly  again. — The  Question  of  Fineness  — The  House  Beautiful — Boys’  Froissart 
— Contemporary  Art  in  Europe  — Art  in  America  — Scribner’s  Portfolio  of  Proofs  ....  41 


CHAPTER  VII 


Scribner’s  Portfolio  — The  “New  School”  — Cole  — Juengling — Kruell 


49 


CONTENTS  — FULL-PAGE  ILLUSTRATIONS 


viii 


CHAPTER  VIII 

Page 

The  "New  School”  continued  — Marsh  — Smithwick  & French  — King — Hoskin  — Wolf  — Muller 

— Davis  — J.  H.  Whitney  — Leblanc  — Kilburn  — The  Chinese  Method 55 


CHAPTER  IX 

Further  Criticism  — Davis  — Closson  — Juengling  and  Kruell  — The  “New  School”  again  — Scrib- 
ner’s Prize  Engravings  — Dry  and  Damp  Printing  — Photography  on  Wood  — Summary  of 
Criticism  — Conclusion 64 


FULL-PAGE  ILLUSTRATIONS 


The  Boar  Hunt 

Meeting  of  Jacob  and  Joseph  . . . 

Cinderella  

Walls  of  the  Grand  Canon  . . . 

Hunters  and  Trappers  in  the  West 

The  Mayflower  at  Sea 

Portrait  of  Fletcher  Harper  . . 

Portrait  of  William  Cullen  Bryant 

Modjeska  as  Juliet 

The  Phorcydes 

The  Flight  of  Night 

Dartmouth  Moors 

Eager  for  the  Fray 

Winifred  Dysart 

Magdalen 

Sleeping  Girl 

The  Professor 

The  Old  Peasant  and  his  Daughter 

The  God  of  Wine 

The  River  God 


Anderson Facing  Titlepage. 

Adams 14 

Jonnard 32 

Annin 40 

Linton 44 

Linton — 

Kruell 46 

Cole 52 

Cole — 

Kruell  54 

Kruell — 

Davis 60 

Davis 66 

Closson — 

Closson — 

Linton — 

Juengling 68 


Juengling — 

Linton 70 

Linton — 


ERRATA. 


Page  44,  Hunters  and  Trappers  in  the  West:  for  F.  W.  0., 
read  F.  0.  C.  Darley.  This  engraving  and  the  Mayflower 
should  have  been  credited  to  the  Pioneers  in  the  Settlement  of 
America , spoken  of  at  page  43. 


THE  HISTORY 


OF 

WOOD-ENGRAVING  IN  AMERICA 


Designed  by  Ludvig  S.  Ipsen.  — Engraved  by  Russell  and  Richardson. 


THE  HISTORY 

OF 

WOOD-ENGRAVING  IN  AMERICA. 


CHAPTER  I. 

HAT  I am  here  attempting  is  a history  of  Engraving  on  Wood 
in  America,  not  a dictionary  of  American  engravers.  For  the 
first  I think  I have  found  enough  to  interest  my  readers ; albeit 
of  printed  record  there  is  nothing  of  any  worth  except  Lossing’s 
Memorial  of  Dr.  Anderson , some  half-dozen  lines  concerning 
three  men  (Anderson,  Dearborn,  and  Hartwell)  in  Drake’s 
Biographical  Dictionary , and  about  as  scanty  information  in 
Dunlap’s  Arts  of  Design  in  the  United  States.  What  I have 
gathered  else  has  been  from  correspondence  or  conversation 
with  the  older  men  yet  living,  impartially  collating  the  same; 
and  from  careful  examination  of  whatever  I could  obtain  access 
to  of  their  and  of  the  later  works.  Of  five  hundred  engravers 
(more  or  less)  of  the  present  day  what  could  I write?  Even  their  names  cannot  be  collected, 

nor  any  recollection  had  of  many  who  are  dead  and  gone.  To  attempt  biographical  notices 

had  been  a vain  task.  So  I have  only  cared,  except  in  two  exceptional  cases,  for  a review  of 

the  rise  and  progress  of  the  art,  with  such  instances  as  I could  select  of  the  best  and  most 

representative  character.  I have  endeavored  to  be  fair  in  my  judgments;  and  if  sometimes  I 
have  omitted  names  or  lost  sight  of  works  that  ought  to  have  been  mentioned  and  noticed,  it 
has  been  from  sheer  oversight,  not  with  intention.  I have  here  to  thank  both  engravers  and 
publishers  for  the  facilities  they  have  afforded  me  in  my  work.  So  much  as  preface. 

At  the  outset  I may  glance  at  a report,  not  without  show  of  probability,  that  Franklin  “ cut 
the  ornaments  for  his  Poor  Richard's  Almanac  in  this  way  ” ; that  is,  on  metal,  in  the  manner  of 
a wood-cut,  for  surface  printing.  He  may  have  done  so.  Blake  the  painter  did  such  metal 
plates  as  well  as  wood-cuts.  The  process  is  the  same.  Nevertheless,  it  is  to  Dr.  Alexander 
Anderson  that  we  may  rightly  ascribe  the  honor  of  being  the  first  engraver  on  wood  in  America. 
Dunlap,  in  his  Arts  of  Design , speaks  of  an  eccentric  genius,  one  John  Roberts,  a Scotchman, 


ANDERSON 


of  whom  Anderson  might  have  learned  the  art.  I believe  this  also  to  be  only  rumor,  based  on 
the  fact  of  Anderson’s  having  been  acquainted  with  the  man,  a miniature-painter  and  copper- 
engraver,  and  having  engraved  on  copper  with  and  for  him.  The  first  knowledge  of  box-wood 
being  used  for  engraving  may  perhaps  have  been  gained  from  Roberts,  the  date  of  his  arrival 
in  this  country  being  that  of  Anderson’s  first  attempts  upon  wood.  It  would  not  subtract  from 
Anderson’s  merit.  Lossing  does  not  intimate  even  the  likelihood  of  such  a beginning.  To 
Lossing  I am  mainly  indebted  for  the  biography  of  Anderson.  Nearly  all  I can  give  concern- 
ing him,  except  some  dates  of  books,  and  of  course  my  own  criticisms  (only  applied  to  work 
I have  seen),  I have  learned  from  his  Memorial , prepared  for  the  Historical  Society  of  New 
York,  read  to  the  members  on  the  5th  of  October,  1870,  and  printed  for  the  Society  in  1872, — 
prepared  from  materials  gathered  from  Dr.  Anderson  himself,  from  his  daughter,  his  grandson, 
and  other  friends. 


Alexander  Anderson,  aged  92. 

Drawn  by  August  Will.  Engraved  by  Elias  J.  Whitney  for  the  “Child’s  Paper,”  1867,  fublished  by  the  American  Tract  Society. 

Alexander  Anderson  was  born  on  the  21st  of  April,  1775,  two  days  after  the  battle  of 
Lexington,  in  the  same  year  that  Bewick  (then  twenty-two  years  of  age)  received  the  premium 
of  the  Society  of  Arts,  in  London,  for  his  engraving  of  The  Huntsman  and  Hound , afterwards 
printed  in  an  edition  of  Gay’s  Fables.  Anderson’s  father  was  a printer,  a Scotchman,  but  a 


ANDERSON 


3 


stanch  supporter  of  the  Colonial  side,  and  a sufferer  for  the  cause.  Young  Anderson’s  taste  for 
art  he  himself  attributed  to  his  mother,  who  was  in  the  habit  of  drawing  for  his  amusement 
when  he  was  a child.  Prints  also  came  before  him  (Hogarth’s  and  others)-  through  his  father’s 
business.  “ These  prints,”  he  writes  in  one  of  his  letters,  “ determined  my  destiny.”  Such 
determination,  one  can  see,  was  also  helped  by  his  getting  hold  of  some  type-ornaments,  which 
gave  him  a notion  of  at  least  one  kind  of  print-production. 

At  school  he  amused  himself  by  copying  engravings.  Then,  reading  in  Rees’  Cyclopcedia  of 
the  process  employed,  he  got  a silversmith  to  roll  him  out  some  copper  cents ; and  with  a 
graver  made  of  the  back-spring  of  a pocket-knife,  ground  to  a point,  started  himself  as  amateur 
engraver  on  copper.  He  was  twelve  years  old  when  he  began ; and  proud  enough,  there  is  no 
doubt,  when  he  had  scratched  out  a head  of  Paul  Jones  and  — he  tells  of  it  himself  in  a brief 
autobiographical  paper  — “got  an  impression  with  red  oil-paint  in  a rude  rolling-press”  of  his 
own  constructing,  — the  same  used  by  him  two  or  three  years  later  in  taking  impressions  of 
his  engraving  of  a head  of  Franklin.  Afterwards  a blacksmith  made  him  some  tools;  and  he 
engraved  ships  and  houses  and  the  like,  for  newspapers,  of  course  in  relief.  In  this  way  he  soon 
earned  money,  only  one  other  person  being  so  engaged  in  New  York. 

On  leaving  school,  his  father  not  approving  of  his  choice  of  engraving  as  a life-business,  he 
was  placed  to  study  medicine  under  Dr.  Joseph  Young,  going  to  him  on  the  1st  of  May,  1789, 
the  day  after  the  inauguration  of  Washington  as  first  President  of  the  United  States.  With  Dr. 
Young  he  remained  five  years,  occupying  his  leisure  hours  with  engraving,  of  the  most  mis- 
cellaneous character,  — anything  from  a dog-collar  or  card  to  a book  frontispiece.  So  that 
before  he  had  eighteen  years  of  age  he  was  employed  by  all  the  printers  and  publishers  in 
New  York,  occasionally  by  others  also,  in  New  Jersey,  in  Philadelphia,  and  even  as  far  as 
Charleston.  At  first  his  artist  work  was  only  on  copper  or  type-metal,  — on  the  latter  I sup- 
pose in  wood  fashion,  to  be  printed  from  the  surface.  But  in  1793,  being  then  eighteen,  he 
had  sight  of  certain  works  by  Bewick  (then  claiming  some  attention  in  England,  and  of  course 
the  echo  of  his  notoriety  reaching  here),  learned  what  material  he  used  (that  perhaps  from 
John  Roberts),  and,  from  the  cuts  themselves,  of  Bewick’s  method.  He  made  trial  of  box-wood, 
and  changed  his  course. 

Some  discrepancy  occurs  here  in  Lossing’s  dates.  He  says  (page  32)  that  Anderson  was 
ignorant  of  the  use  of  box-wood  until  “early  in  1794,”  when  he  was  favored  with  a sight  of 
Bewick’s  Birds  and  Quadrupeds.  In  the  same  page  he  writes:  “The  first  mention  of  its  use 
for  gain  in  his  Diary  is  under  the  date  of  the  25th  of  June,  1793,  when  he  engraved  a tobacco- 
stamp.  A fezv  days  afterzvard  he  agreed  to  engrave  on  wood  one  hundred  geometrical  figures 
for  S.  Campbell,  a New  York  bookseller,  for  fifty  cents  each,  Campbell  finding  the  wood.  This 
was  procured  from  Ruthven,  a maker  of  carpenter’s  tools,  who  at  first  charged  three  cents  apiece 
for  the  blocks,  but  finally  asked  four  cents.”  To  properly  face  the  wood  was  a new,  and  no 
doubt  a difficult,  kind  of  work  for  him.  “ Campbell,”  Tossing  tells  us,  “ was  not  well  pleased,  but 
concluded  he  must  give  him  that.  It  was  more  than  a year  after  that  before  Anderson  ventured 
to  engrave  elaborate  pictures  on  the  wood.”  The  first  of  these  were  for  Durell,  the  date  of 
which  Lossing  gives  as  1794,  showing  that  the  previous  statement  of  1794  as  the  time  of  his 
first  acquaintance  with  Bewick  and  box-wood  must  be  wrong,  — most  likely  a misprint.  Bewick’s 
Quadrupeds , however,  Anderson  himself  tells  us  in  his  Diary  (this  quoted  too  by  Tossing)  he 
first  saw  on  the  17th  of  August,  1795.  The  book  first  seen  may  have  been  The  Looking-Glass 
for  the  Mind,  an  earlier  work  of  Bewick. 

In  1794  then,  at  the  age  of  nineteen,  having  given  a year  to  experiments  on  the  wood,  he 
was  actually,  for  William  Durell,  a New  York  publisher,  copying  these  Looking-Glass  cuts  still 
upon  type  metal,  when,  the  work  about  one  third  done,  lie  felt  satisfied  that  he  could  do  them 
better  upon  wood;  and  in  September  of  that  year  attempted  one  of  them  in  the  new  material. 
Here  are  extracts  from  his  Diary:  — 


4 


ANDERSON 


“Sept.  24. — This  morning  I was  quite  discouraged  on 
seeing  a crack  in  the  box-wood.  Employed  as  usual  at 
the  Doctor’s.  Came  home  to  dinner,  glued  the  wood,  and 
began  again  with  fresh  hopes  of  producing  a good  wood- 
engraving.” 

“Sept.  26. — This  morning  rose  at  five  o’clock.  Took 
a little  walk.  Engraved.  Employed  during  the  chief  part 
of  the  forenoon  in  taking  out  medicine.  Came  home 
after  dinner  and  finished  the  wooden  cut.  Was  pretty 
well  satisfied  with  the  impression,  and  so  was  Durell. 
Desired  the  turner  to  prepare  the  other  twenty-four.” 

The  remainder  of  the  book  was  done  on  wood.  [In 
1800  a new  edition,  brought  out  by  Longworth,  was  altogether  on  wood.]  Thenceforth  type- 
metal  was  discarded,  and  Anderson  became  an  ENGRAVER  ON  WOOD. 

In  1795  he  was  licensed  to  practise  medicine.  When,  soon  after,  the  yellow-fever  prevailed 
in  New  York,  he  was  appointed  by  the  health  commissioners  of  the  city  as  resident  physician 

at  Bellevue  Hospital,  three  miles  out  of  town  : his  salary  twenty  shillings  a day.  He  was  there 

three  months,  from  August  to  November,  1795,  for  part  of  the  time  the  only  physician,  at  one 
period  with  from  thirty  to  forty  patients  under  his  care.  Notwithstanding  this  heavy  charge,  he 
found  time  for  his  favorite  engraving.  Yet  not  neglecting  his  hospital  duty,  as  is  sufficiently 

proved  by  the  offer  to  him  shortly  afterwards  of  the  post  of  Physician  to  the  New  York  Dis- 

pensary, which  his  passion  for  art  forbade  his  accepting.  In  the  next  year  he  received  his 
diploma  as  Doctor  of  Medicine.  He  was  now  a physician,  a designer  and  engraver  (on  both 
wood  and  copper),  and  (having  taken  a store  for  the  purpose)  a bookseller  and  publisher  of 
small  illustrated  works.  The  bookselling,  not  bringing  profit,  had  to  be  given  up.  Not  so  the 
engraving,  which  still  alternated  with  his  practice  as  a physician,  a practice  successfully  con- 
tinued by  him,  though  against  the  grain,  — for  he  was  net  only  conscientious,  but  “morbidly 
sensitive,”  — until  1798.  In  1798  the  yellow-fever  again  visited  New  York.  Anderson’s  infant 
son  died  of  it  in  July;  and  in  September  his  wife,  his  father  and  mother,  his  brother,  mother-in- 
law,  and  a sister-in-law,  had  all  fallen  victims.  Utterly  desolate,  one  can  understand  how  he  had 
no  heart  left  for  the  active  medical  life.  He  voyaged  next  year  to  the  West  Indies,  and  two 
or  three  months  spent  with  an  uncle,  who  was  “ King’s  botanist  ” in  the  island  of  St.  Vincent, 
stirred  in  him  some  care  for  botany,  — a consolation  in  his  sorrow;  but  we  cannot  wonder  that 
henceforth  he  preferred  the  quiet  seclusion  of  an  engraver’s  work.  The  early  delight  became  his 
sole  occupation  and  his  solace.  Seventy  years  remained  for  him.  He  married  again,  a sister 
of  his  wife.  But  it  is  time  I turned  from  the  personal  history  of  the  man  (well  worthy  of  more 
amplification,  for  he  was  a man  of  extraordinary  character  and  talent,  at  once  physician,  engraver, 
designer,  botanist,  musician,  and  verse-maker)  to  the  special  subject  of  my  writing,  a considera- 
tion of  the  engravings  produced  by  him. 

I may  omit,  beyond  mention  of  a few,  those  executed  by  him  in  copper,  as  well  as  those 
upon  type-metal.  In  1793  he  had  not  only  acquaintance,  but  employment,  with  John  Roberts, 
before  spoken  of;  helping  him  in  his  work  and  also  engraving  plates  for  him,  among  them  a 
portrait  of  Francis  I.  as  frontispiece  to  Robertson’s  Charles  the  Fifth , published  in  New  York  in 
1800.  Numerous  other  plates  he  engraved  for  various  publications:  his  last  important  works  of 
the  kind  in  1812,  a copy  of  Holbein’s  Last  Supper , six  inches  by  eight,  to  illustrate  a quarto 
Bible ; and  some  allegorical  designs  of  his  own,  the  Wheel  of  Fortune  and  the  Twelve  Stages  of 
Human  Life — from  the  Cradle  to  the  Grave.  I pass  now  to  his  engravings  on  wood,  to  which 
after  1812  he  chiefly  devoted  himself. 

His  first,  as  before  said,  were  those  for  the  Looking-Glass  of  the  Mind , done  for  Durell, — 
poor  cuts  certainly  in  manipulation,  but  not  without  an  artist’s  feeling ; his  originals  were  poor. 


. 


From  the  “Looking-Glass  of  the  Mind.’ 


ANDERSON 


S 


Durell,  writes  Lossing,  “ became  an  extensive  reprinter  of  Eng- 
lish works,  small  and  great,  from  toy-books  to  a folio  edition 
of  Josephus  and  more  than  a hundred  volumes  of  English 
Classics.  He  employed  Anderson  to  reproduce  the  pictures  in 
these  works,”  (seldom,  I imagine,  more  than  a single  frontis- 
piece, — the  custom  then,)  “ and  they  were  done  with  great 
skill  considering  his  opportunities.”  For  Hugh  Gaine,  the  emi- 
nent journalist  during  the  Revolution,  he  engraved  “ on  type- 
metal  ” illustrations  of  the  Pilgrim's  Progress;  for  Brewer,  cuts 
for  Tom  Thumb's  Folio ; for  Harrison,  pictures  for  a book  of 
Fables ; for  Babcock,  of  Hartford,  fifteen  cuts  for  fifty  shillings; 
for  Reid,  Campbell,  and  Wood,  portraits  and  cuts  for  their 
several  editions  of  Dilworth’s  Spelling  Book  ; for  Philip  Freneau, 
the  poet,  cuts  for  a Primer ; and  in  1795  began  engraving  the 
cuts  for  an  edition  of  Webster’s  Spelling  Book  for  Bunce  & Co. 

(afterwards  published  by  Cooledge).  So  Lossing,  from  whose  words  it  would  seem  that  all  these 
works  except  the  Pilgrim  s Progress  were  engraved  on  wood.  I incline,  however,  to  think  that 
some,  if  not  all  but  the  Webster,  were  early  works,  and  on  metal.  There  is  no  finding  out  with- 
out sight  of  the  metal  or  wood  blocks  themselves.  After  all  it  matters  not:  his  type-metal 
work,  speaking  Hibernice , was  only  wood-engraving  on  metal. 

Of  some  later  works  I can  speak  with  more  certainty.  In  1796  he  drew  and  engraved  his 
great  cut  of  the  human  skeleton,  a cut  three  feet  high,  enlarged  from  Albinus’s  Anatomy.  Of 
this  cut,  which  he  was  justly  proud  of,  (he  showed  it  to  me  the  only  time  I saw  him,  not  long 
before  his  death,)  but  two  or  three  impressions  were  ever  printed,  the  block  being  broken  by 
the  pressure.  It  was  indeed  a remarkable  work,  especially  for  that  time.  He  also  drew  and 
engraved,  on  wood  and  copper,  illustrations  for  an  early  edition  of  Irving’s  and  Paulding’s 
Salmagundi ; copied  fifty  cuts  done  for  Emblems  of  Mortality  (Holbein’s  Dance  of  Death ) by 
Thomas  and  John  Bewick,  published  in  1810  by  John  Babcock  of  Hartford,  Conn.,  and  repub- 
lished by  Babcock  & Co.,  Charleston,  and  S.  Babcock,  New  Haven,  in  1846,  on  which  occasion 
“ three  of  the  cuts,  representing  Adam  and  Eve  in  various  situations,  it  was  thought  advisable  to 
omit.”  The  last  cut  was  also  omitted,  “ being  apparently  obscure  in  its  design  to  an  American 
reader.”  In  1802,  for  David  Longworth,  he  undertook  the  reproduction  of  Bewick’s  Quadrupeds , 
three  hundred  cuts. 


From  Bewick’s  "Quadrupeds,”  as  Re-engraved  by  Anderson. 


I have  not  been  able  to  obtain  a sight  of  Anderson’s  book ; the  one  copy  I heard  of  in 
the  Society  Library,  New  York,  having  been  taken  away  and  not  returned.  But  I have  seen 
the  cuts,  the  electrotype  plates  having  fallen  into  the  hands  of  another  publisher,  T.  W.  Strong, 
who  made  use  of  them,  with  the  Bewick  letter-press  also,  for  a series  of  children’s  toy-books. 
Comparing  them  with  the  English  originals,  I find  that  they  are  all  directly  copied  from  Bewick, 


6 


ANDERSON 


From  the  Shakspere. — After  Thompson, 


appearing  in  the  Anderson  edition  reversed.  No  doubt 
this  was  done,  transfer  of  prints  not  being  then  under- 
stood, to  facilitate  the  work  of  the  draughtsman,  though 
thereby  the  engraver  had  to  follow  back-handed  the 
lines  of  his  master.  Considering  the  little  practice  on 
wood  which  Anderson  had  then  had,  they  are  wonder- 
fully close  copies : varying  in  excellence,  but  all  very 
faithful  in  drawing  and  good  in  engraving;  tamer  cer- 
tainly than  the  originals,  as  must  be  expected,  and 
much  inferior  to  them,  yet  showing  a real  artistic 
perception  of  their  best  qualities.  About  this  time 
also  he  may  have  engraved  for  Longworth  the  Fables 
of  Flora : head-vignettes  on  copper,  tail-pieces  on 
wood.  He  speaks  too  (in  the  very  brief  sketch  of 
his  own  life,  written  by  him  in  1848,  in  the  seventy- 
third  year  of  his  age)  of  Mr.  Samuel  Wood  as  one 
of  his  “most  constant  employers,”  — I suppose  at 
about  this  period  of  1800,  or  later.  Wood  was  still 
in  business  twenty  years  afterwards.  “ I did,”  says 
Anderson,  “ an  infinity  of  cuts  for  his  excellent  set  of  small  books.” 

In  1812  he  engraved  a dozen  cuts  for  a Shakspere  for  Monroe  & Francis:  copies  from 
cuts  by  John  Thompson,  after  Thurston’s  designs.  They  are  noticeable  as  the  chief  of  his  very 
few  departures  from  the  style  of  his  favorite  Bewick.  Yet  not  altogether  a departure.  Thomp- 
son’s work  was,  I have  no  doubt,  in  the  usual  manner  of  Thurston,  a rich  crossed  black  line; 
Anderson,  keeping  the  general  order  of  lines,  has  cut  out  the  crossings,  doing  the  work  rather 
in  white  line,  though  the  feeling  and  drawing  and  much  of  the  character  of  the  original 
engraving  are  preserved.  He  copied  in  similar  style  a series  of  the  Seven  Ages , also  by 
Thompson.  About  1818  he  appears  at  his  best.  That  date  is  given  by  Lossing  to  four  large 
engravings  after  the  German  artist,  Ridinger,  engravings  (Lossing  says)  12 ^ by  9J-  inches,  illus- 
trating the  Four  Seasons.  Lossing  adds : “ He  also  en- 
graved on  a little  smaller  scale  the  same  subject  from 
paintings  by  Teniers.”  After  a long  search  I came  to  the 
conclusion,  in  which  a conversation  with  Dr.  Lewis  (the 
grandson)  has  since  confirmed  me,  that  Lossing’s  statement 
is  incorrect.  Only  two,  instead  of  eight  subjects,  were  en- 
graved by  him,  copied,  it  would  seem,  from  copper  plates, 
only  using  white  line  instead  of  black : one  by  Ridinger, 
Returning  from  the  Boar-Hunt , its  measurement  slightly 
different  from  that  given  by  Lossing;  the  other  after  Teniers, 
Waterfowl , a square  subject  11J  by  8f  inches.  I suppose 
he  may  have  executed  these  as  a trial  of  strength,  or  as 
a speculation,  with  hope  of  having  the  series  taken  up  by 
some  publisher;  and  that,  disappointed  in  this  hope,  he 
did  not  care  to  complete  the  sets.  The  Ridinger  (here- 
with given)  speaks  for  itself.  No  more  vigorous  piece  of 
pure  white  line  work  has  been  done  outside  of  the  Bewick 
circle.  By  pure  white  line  I mean  a line  drawn  with 
meaning  by  the  graver.  The  Teniers,  a reedy  lake  with  wild  ducks  in  the  water  and  others 
flying,  and  some  rabbits  under  trees  on  a bank,  is  scarcely  if  at  all  inferior  to  the  other.  The 
date  of  1818  is  engraved  on  this. 


From  the  “Fables  of  Pilpay.” 


ANDERSON 

I find  no  date  for  the  Fables  of  Pilpay  (lately  republished 
by  Hurd  and  Houghton),  some  fifty  or  more  small  cuts  fol- 
lowing the  designs  of  an  English  edition,  but  “ better  en- 
graved,” says  Lossing.  They  are  of  Anderson’s  best  work, 
better  in  command  of  line  and  finer  than  his  ordinary  work ; 
and  may  perhaps  be  placed  about  this  time,  but  I only 
hazard  a guess.  Somewhere  at  this  date  also  I would  look 
for  a Paul  and  Virginia , of  which  I have  only  seen  four  or 
five  cuts,  copies  of  course,  but  with  delicacy  of  line  and 
touch  not  usual  with  him.  For  the  twenty  years  following 
the  two  Ridinger  and  Teniers  cuts  I can  find  nothing  certain. 

Lossing,  not  very  orderly  or  regular  in  his  list  of  works,  has 
that  width  of  gap.  I am  disposed,  however,  to  place  here 
some  illustrations  to  Peter  Parley  s APagazine  and  other  pub- 
lications of  the  same  author,  and  a series  of  large  and  rather 
coarse  Bible  cuts.  (See  next  page.)  There  seems  to  have 
been  no  encouragement  for  such  work  as  he  proved  himself  capable  of  when  he  did  the  Ridinger 
and  Teniers.  The  next  noticeable  work  I find  is  in  O’Reilly’s  Sketches  of  Rochester,  1838,  which 
contains  cuts  by  him,  and  Hall,  and  J.  W.  Orr,  generally  street  views  or  buildings,  very  stiff 
and  formal ; Anderson’s  the  best,  with  an  exactness  and  evenness  of  line  hardly  to  be  expected 
after  his  earlier  free-handedness.  Of  the  same  character,  and  about  the  same  date,  or  it  may 
be  somewhat  ear- 
lier, is  a series 
of  larger  cuts  of 
old  buildings  in 
the  city  of  New 
York,  done  for 
the  New  York 
Mirror.  He  en- 
graved also  in- 
itial letters  for 
Mrs.  Balmanno’s 
Pen  and  Pencil ; 
the  illustrations 
to  Downing’s 
Landscape  Gar- 
dening, 1841  ; and  some  forty  designs  by  T.  H.  Matteson  for  a Shakspere  published  by  Cooledge 
& Brother  in  1853.  Later  in  life  his  handiwork  appeared  in  Bentley’s  Spelling  Book ; and  yet 
later  in  a series  of  Revolutionary  portraits.  For  many  years  he  engraved  for  the  American 
Tract  Society  small  cuts,  easily  distinguished,  to  be  found  in  their  early  publications.  For  many 
years  also  he  was  in  the  habit  of  engraving  a larger  and  coarser  class  of  work,  chiefly  illustra- 
tions of  the  life  of  the  B.  Virgin  Mary,  for  Spanish  printers  in  the  West  Indies,  Mexico,  and 
South  America.  Of  these  and  of  the  Matteson  series  (neither  worthy  of  his  best  powers)  suffi- 
cient specimens  are  given  in  the  Lossing  Memorial.  Some  of  his  latest  works,  if  not  his  last, 
were  from  drawings  by  H.  L.  Stephens,  done  for  T.  W.  Strong.  Fie  was  at  work  for  his  own 
amusement,  I believe,  to  within  a few  days  of  his  death.  He  died  on  the  17th  of  January,  1870, 
in  the  ninety-fifth  year  of  his  age. 

Considering  the  vast  amount  of  work  accomplished  by  him,  the  many  thousands  of  cuts  lie- 
engraved,  it  is  surprising  how  little  can  be  met  with  even  after  a very  careful  and  persistent 
search.  Of  the  many  cuts  in  Mr.  Lossing’s  earnestly  admiring  Memorial  there  are  not  five  that 


8 


ANDERSON 


seem  to  me  very 
dubiously  dated. 
Most  are  very 
small,  many  mere 
inch-square  trifles 
done  for  his  own 
pleasure,  eviden- 
ces that  he  retained 
his  artistic  percep- 

Balaam  and  the  Angel. 

tions,  with  some 

very  notable  amount  of  his  old  manual  skill  also,  — proofs  of  the  man’s  indomitable  perseverance 
and  unfailing  love  for  his  occupation  ; but  in  themselves,  as  engravings,  without  thought  of  him 
and  his  age,  not  very  remarkable.  One  little  cut  (here  poorly  reproduced)  shows  an  exceptional 
minuteness  and  delicacy.  But  there  is  not  enough  in  any  of  them  to  command  much  admira- 
tion simply  as  graver-work.  And  the  same  may  be  not  unfairly  said  even  of  the  work  of  his 
prime.  1 he  copies  of  Bewick  (the  staple  of  his  best  work)  are  wonderful,  having  regard  to  the 

circumstances  in  which  they  were  produced;  but  no  ap- 
preciator  of  Bewick  could  speak  of  them  as  worthy  of 
comparison  with  the  originals.  They  are  curiously  good 
copies,  valuable  pioneer  work,  helps  toward  better.  After 
these  early  things  there  is  little  improvement.  I find  only 
the  two  large  cuts  standing  out  as  marks  of  a capacity 
which  had  not  corresponding  development.  Such  cuts  as  are  given  in  the  Memorial , not  copies,  but 
altogether  his  own  work,  (allowing  that  there  may  not  have  been  much  opportunity  for  choice,) 
beui  out  this  judgment.  The  Lear  and  Twelfth  Night,  from  Matteson’s  drawings,  page,  38,  where 


From  the  Moreau  Collection. 


would  establish 
Anderson’s  preten- 
sion to  be  even  a 
good  engraver.  In 
the  collection  pri- 
vately printed  by 
Mr.  Moreau,  1872, 
“ one  hundred  and 
fifty  engravings 
executed  after  his 
ninetieth  year,”  we 
of  course  do  not 
look  for  anything 
of  much  impor- 
tance. The  best 
there  is  a copy 
from  a tail -piece 
from  Bewick  (not 
by  Bewick’s  own 
hand,  but  Clen- 
nell’s),  which  I 
have  no  hesitation 
in  attributing  to 
much  earlier  years. 
Some  others  also 


ANDERSON 


9 


the  line  is  his  own,  the  Holy  Family , page  65,  the 
Embargo , page  70,  are  but  common  cuts.  Prob- 
ably his  life  through  he  was  working  for  low 
prices,  and  there  was  neither  demand  nor  appre- 
ciation for  better  work.  None  the  less,  however 
excused,  he  has  to  suffer  the  reproach  of  inferi- 
ority. It  is  an  ungrateful  task  to  pick  out  faults. 

It  is  part,  though,  of  the  critic’s  duty.  He  has 
to  distinguish  — let  it  be  generously,  yet  truly  — 
between  the  good  and  the  bad,  the  better  and 
the  worse. « In  truth,  except  within  the  limitation  of  hindering  circumstances  entitling  him  to 
credit  for  overcoming  so  much  of  obstacle,  a close  study  of  all  of  Dr.  Anderson’s  engraving  on 
wood  that  I have  been  able  to  get  sight  of  fails  to  draw  from  me  a recognition  of  his  special 
genius  as  an  engraver.  Had  his  work  been  original,  like  Bewick’s,  it  had,  indeed,  been  great; 
but,  practised  as  he  was  on  metal,  and  with  Bewick’s  work  before  him,  one  thinks  that,  with  his 
undoubted  artistic  feeling,  conscientious  study,  and  constant  industry,  he  should  have  done  more. 
He  never  equalled  his  master,  nor  have  I seen  anything  of  his  (except  the  two  large  cuts)  to 
compare  with  the  work  of  Bewick’s  pupils,  Nesbit,  Clennell,  Hole,  Hughes,  or  Harvey.  It  must 
be  owned,  however,  that  we  never  see  him  at  his 
best.  Bad  printing  is  not  favorable  to  an  en- 
graver’s reputation,  nor  does  good  printing  avail 
on  worn  blocks.  The  only  specimens  we  are 
able  to  give  are  but  phototypes  from  ill-printed 
impressions.  After  all  deductions,  his  is  the  honor 
of  being  the  first  wood-engraver  in  America. 

For  the  rest,  so  remarkable  was  the  man,  so 
worthy  of  honor  for  himself  as  well  as  for  the 
variety  of  his  knowledges  and  doings,  that  he 
can  well  afford  to  be  rated  lower  in  this  one  of 
his  endeavors,  can  well  submit  to  be  considered  under  this  one  aspect  of  engraver  on  wood 
as  first  in  time  only,  not  in  the  average  of  the  work  he  did.  Of  his  faculty  as  an  engraver  on 
copper  and  as  a designer,  it  has  not  been  within  my  province  to  speak.  The  esteem  of  his 
artist  contemporaries  was  shown  by  his  election,  in  May,  1843,  as  an  honorary  member  of  the 
National  Academy  of  Design.  He  had  also  been  a member  of  the  earlier  New  York  Academy 
of  the  Fine  Arts. 


After  Bewick. 


Tail-piece.  — After  Clennel. 


CHAPTER  II 


HE  beginning  of  engraving  made  by  Anderson  others  followed. 
He  himself  had  only  four  pupils:  Garret  Lansing,  — I quote 
from  Lossing,  — “of  the  old  Lansing  family  of  Albany;  William 
Morgan,  of  New  York;  John  H.  Hall,  of  Albany;  and  his  (own) 
daughter  Ann,  who  became  the  wife  of  Andrew  Maverick,  a 
copperplate-engraver.  LANSING  received  instructions  in  the  year 
1804,  and  was  the  second  wood-engraver  in  America.”  He  re- 
turned to  Albany,  and  began  business,  depending  for  employ- 
ment on  Anderson,  who  sent  him  box-wood  and  drawings  “ by 
the  Albany  sloop.”  In  1806,  (still  from  Lossing,)  “he  was 
married  to  a young  lady  of  wealth,  as  fortunes  were  estimated 
in  those  days,  and  went  to  Boston  for  the  purpose  of  practising  his  art  there,”  but  was  so 
little  encouraged  that  he  went  back,  and  afterwards  made  his  home  in  New  York.  He  was 
“ skilful  in  the  engraving  of  machinery.”  I cannot  recover  anything  of  his  work.  MORGAN 
“ engraved  well,”  but  abandoned  the  graver  for  the  pencil.  Though  spoken  of  as  Anderson’s 
favorite  draughtsman,  he  seems  to  have  made  no  particular  impress.  Hall  I shall  have  to 
speak  of  later. 

Nathaniel  Dearborn,  a stationer  and  printer  and  engraver  on  copper,  whose  card  in  1814 
bore  the  words,  “ Engraver  on  Wood,  School  St.,  Boston,”  is  said  to  have  brought  wood-engraving 
to  Boston  in  1811.  Drake  calls  him  “one  of  the  first”  engravers.  He  was  the  publisher,  so 
late  as  1848,  of  Boston  Notions , projected  in  1814  and  part-published  in  1817,  containing  (says 
Lossing)  his  earlier  engravings.  I believe,  however,  that  he  was  only  a letter-engraver;  and 
that  the  first  engraver  on  wood  in  Boston,  entitled  to  that  distinction,  was  Abel  Bowen. 

Abel  Bowen  (Abel  C.  according  to  Lossing,  only  Abel  on  books  published  by  him, 
A.  Bowen  on  his  cuts),  was  born  at  Greenbush,  opposite  Albany,  New  York;  and,  after  serving 
an  apprenticeship  at  Hudson,  began  business  for  himself  as  a printer  in  Boston.  He  was  also 
an  engraver  on  copper,  where  or  of  whom  learning  the  art  I do  not  find,  — probably  also  at 
Hudson.  No  doubt  his  work  on  copper  led  to  relief-work  on  metal  (in  the  manner  of  wood- 
engraving) for  surface-printing,  and  thence  to  engraving  on  wood,  which  he  began  to  practise 
in  1812,  I believe  self-taught.  Lossing  speaks  of  “his  style”  as  “more  like  the  English  engrav- 
ings of  our  day  than  like  Bewick’s  ” ; but  this  must  be  taken  to  mean  only  that  he  copied  later 
works  as  well  as  Bewick’s.  Style  can  hardly  be  called  his : he  was  the  faithful  imitator  of  the 
various  works  which  in  the  course  of  his  business  he  had  to  copy.  I have  before  me  some 
cuts  for  an  American  edition  of  the  Young  Lady's  Book  (published  by  him  in  1830),  containing 
over  seven  hundred  engravings  (including  small  initial  letters),  copies  of  cuts  by  Thompson, 
S.  Williams,  Bonner,  and  others.  Three  of  them,  after  those  three  very  different  engravers 
(that  after  Thompson  here  given  — unfortunately  only  from  a process  reproduction,  which  fails 


BOWEN  — MASON  — BARBER 


After  Thompson. — By  A.  Bowen. 
From  the  “ Young  Lady’s  Book.” 


to  render  its  delicacy),  are  very  remarkable  for  their 
fidelity  to  the  originals.  The  distinguishing  manner 
of  each  engraver  is  so  exactly  preserved  that  I was 
with  difficulty  convinced  the  cuts  were  not  done 
from  transfers.  Besides  this  Young  Lady  s Book , his 
most  important  work  in  engraving,  he  published 
several  books:  the  Naval  Monument , in  1816,  copy- 
righted in  1815,  with  one  hundred  and  twenty-five 
engravings,  one  by  Anderson,  the  rest  Bowen’s  own, 
the  book  also  compiled  by  him ; A Topographical 
and  Historical  Description  of  Boston , in  1817,  with 
cuts  from  drawings  by  S.  Dearborn ; a History  of 
Boston,  with  engravings  on  wood  and  metal;  also 
Bowen’s  Picture  of  Boston,  with  two  copperplates, 
beside  wood-cuts,  by  himself,  and  other  copperplates 
by  Joseph  Andrews,  in  1829.  The  work  through  all 
these  is  very  much  of  the  same  character  as  Dr. 

Anderson’s  earliest  cuts. 

In  1810,  William  Mason,  a native  of  Connecti- 
cut, introduced  the  art  to  Philadelphia.  He  was  soon 
followed  by  his  pupil,  Gilbert.  Later  I come  upon 
the  names  of  Fairchild,  in  Hartford;  Horton,  in  Bal- 
timore; Barber,  in  New  Haven.  Of  the  last,  still 
living  in  New  Haven,  in  his  eighty-third  year,  I am 
able  to  give  some  brief  notice. 

John  W.  Barber  was  born  at  Windsor,  Conn., 
on  the  2d  of  February,  1798.  When  he  was  but 
thirteen  years  old,  the  death  of  his  father  left  him 
as  sole  support  of  his  family.  He  worked  on  their 
small  farm,  learned  to  hoe  and  dig  and  plough,  to 
cut  wood,  milk  a cow,  drive  a yoke  of  cattle,  also 
to  “turn  up  brick  in  a brick-yard,  and  to  pound 
clothes  for  the  women  on  washing-days.”  Before 
then,  a studious,  thoughtful  boy,  fascinated  by  the 
pictures  in  his  books,  he  had  begun  to  imitate  them,  — “at  seven  years  of  age”  trying  his 
hand  on  a pen-and-ink  design  for  Nelson’s  victory  at  Trafalgar.  At  East  Windsor  the  then 
best  letter-engraver  in  the  United  States,  Mr.  Abner  Reid,  had  a bank-note  engraving  establish- 
ment, and  to  him  the  young  farmer  was  apprenticed.  Philadelphian  Mason,  also  an  apprentice 
of  Reid’s,  must  have  been  there  not  long  before  him.  In  1823,  he  came  to  New  Haven  and 
took  an  office  for  engraving.  Since  then  he  has  been  at  once  draughtsman,  engraver,  author, 
editor,  and  publisher.  The  first  of  his  publications  was  a series  of  wood-cuts  on  a half-sheet: 
B uny an  s Pilgrim  s Progress  exhibited  in  a Metamorphosis,  or  a Transformation  of  Pictures.  Of 
his  many  works  the  principal  have  been  topographical  and  historical:  History  and  Antiquities  of 
New  Haven  ; History  of  New  England ; European  Historical  Collections  ; Collections  of  Connecticut ; 
etc.  For  the  Connecticut  history,  published  in  1837,  he  travelled  in  a one-horse  wagon,  collect- 
ing materials  and  making  sketches  for  the  two  hundred  illustrations  to  the  book.  From  1856  to 
1861  he  was  preparing  The  Past  and  Present  of  the  United  States,  for  which  lie  engraved  some 
four  hundred  cuts  from  original  drawings  by  himself.  I may  speak  in  this  place  even  of  his 
latest  works,  for  they  are  all  of  the  style  and  character  of  the  earliest  days,  without  change  or 
improvement.  His  chief  ambition  has  been,  not  success  in  engraving,  but  to  “ preach  the  Gospel 


After  Bewick..  — By  A.  Bowen. 


12 


ADAMS 


by  means  of  pictures  ” : toward  which  end  he  has 
issued,  in  addition  to  his  historical,  various  emble- 
matic books,  since  combined  in  a thick  octavo 
volume  known  as  the  Bible  Looking-Glass , of 
which  it  must  be  owned  that  the  pious  intention 
asks  more  praise  than  either  the  designs  or  the 
engraving.  The  cut  here  given,  from  Easy  Lessons 
in  Reading,  New  Haven,  1824,  is  a fair  sample  of 
his  work.  He  could  not  be  neglected  in  a history 
of  American  engraving. 

Joseph  Alexander  Adams,  next  of  impor- 
tance in  order  of  time,  stands  out  also  as  first  in 
talent  in  our  historical  course.  Nearly  all  I know  of  him  (self-taught  like  Anderson  and  Bowen) 

I have  learned  either  from  his  letters  to  me  or  in  recent  conversations  with  him.  He  had  been 
so  entirely  forgotten  that  1 had  difficulty  in  finding  that  he  was  yet  alive:  his  name  on  the  books 
of  the  National  Academy  of  Design,  of  which  he  became  an  associate  in  1841,  being  only  re- 
tained because  the  Academy  had  not  been  notified  of  his  death.  He  was  born  at  New  German- 
town, Hunterdon  County,  New  Jersey,  in  1803;  and  was  apprenticed  at  an  early  age  to  the 
printing  business,  having  successively  three  masters,  the  first  failing  and  the  second  giving  up 
business.  At  the  age  of  twenty-one  he  went  to  New  York,  and  for  three  weeks  worked  there 
as  a journeyman  printer.  During  his  apprenticeship  he  first  tried  his  hand  at  engraving.  A 

cut  of  a boot  was  wanted  for  some  shoemaker’s  newspaper  advertisement,  and  the  printer’s  fore- 
man attempted  to  engrave  one.  Engravers  were  scarce  in  those  days:  only  three,  I think,  in 
New  York,  — Anderson  and  his  pupils,  Lansing  and  Morgan.  The  foreman  unsuccessful,  young 
Adams  made  attempt,  and  so  far  succeeded  as  to  satisfy  the  immediate  need  and  to  stimulate 
himself  to  further  essays,  though  without  any  instruction,  and  knowing  absolutely  nothing  of  the 
ordinary  process  of  engraving.  In  his  own  words,  he  proceeded  as  follows: — “I  intensely 

blackened  the  block  with  India  ink,  then  marked  the  outlines  of  the  subject  with  a point,  and 
cut  away  at  it.  I had  not  then  even  heard  of  finished  drawings  being  made  on  the  wood.  I 
worked  in  this  manner  for  about  six  months.  One  day  Mr.  Samuel  Wood,  a publisher  of 
juvenile  books,  advised  me  to  go  to  see  Dr.  Anderson.  I told  him  I was  afraid  he  might  think 
I wanted  to  steal  his  art ; but  he  replied  that  the  Doctor  was  not  a man  of  that  kind.  I mus- 
tered courage,  and,  after  walking  several  times  to  and  fro  in  front  of  his  house,  ventured  to 
knock  at  the  door,  entered,  and  saw  him  for  the  first  time.  I found  him  very  pleasant  and 
communicative.  He  showed  me  the  block  he  was  then  working  on;  and,  to  my  astonishment, 
I found  the  whole  design  was  neatly  washed  on  the  block,  complete,  with  India  ink  alone.  This 
was  entirely  a new  idea  to  me.  I went  home,  and  the  next  day  adopted  the  same  plan,  which 
I pursued  ever  after.  The  Doctor  was  very  kind  to  me ; gave  me  many  hints,  such  as  lowering 
parts  of  the  block  after  the  manner  of  Bewick,  so  as  to  print  faintly.  He  also  sent  me  customers 
occasionally.  He  laid  before  me  several  of  Bewick’s  works  which  I had  never  heard  of  before, 

and  also  showed  me  many  other  specimens  of  cuts  done  by  English  and  old  German  artists.” 

I he  cuts  done  in  those  days  were  few,  the  principal  for  toy-books  and  similar  juvenile  works, 
published  by  Samuel  Wood,  Mahlon  Day,  Solomon  King,  and  other  New  York  publishers. 
Now  and  then  a frontispiece  or  a few  cuts  in  the  text  of  a book  would  be  wanted;  but  most 
of  the  work  required  was  for  labels  for  cotton  goods,  or  soap-stamps,  hand-bills,  playing-cards, 
and  such  like.  Books  were  not  profusely  illustrated  as  now,  — what  illustration  was  used  was 
generally  copperplate ; and  the  young  engraver  knew  what  it  was  to  be  out  of  work  and  at 
times  without  a cent  in  his  pocket.  But  he  persevered.  In  1831  he  was  able  to  make  a voyage 
to  England,  probably  incited  to  that  by  the  coming  to  this  country,  in  1829,  of  Abraham  J. 
Mason,  an  English  wood-engraver,  from  whom  he  may  have  had  introductions  to  Thompson, 


From  “Easy  Lessons  in  Reading.”  — By  Barber. 


MEETING  OF  JACOB  AND  JOSEPH. 

ENGRAVED  BY  J.  A.  ADAMS. 


FROM  HARPER'S  ILLUMINATED  BIBLE. 


ADAMS 


13 


Bonner,  and  others.  He  was  gone  four  months,  seeing,  learning,  and  his  ambition  spurred  by 
what  he  saw  to  higher  effort.  Two  or  three  years  after  his  return  he  drew  (a  copy  from  a 
copperplate)  and  engraved  a frontispiece  for  the  Treasury  of  Knowledge , published  in  New  York 
by  James  Conner:  on  a small  duodecimo  page  a full-length  portrait  of  Washington,  in  a square 
2\  X if  inches,  surrounded  by  circular  subjects  rather  less  than  a nickel  cent,  the  arms  of  the 
thirteen  States  of  the  Union  enwreathed  with  oak  and  laurel,  a figure  of  Liberty  at  top,  — the 
minuteness  and  delicacy  of  which  may  challenge  comparison  with  anything  I know  of  in  engrav- 
ing on  wood.  This  was  executed  in  1834.  Not  so  minute,  but  of  equal  excellence,  is  another 
frontispiece,  of  the  same  size,  with  figures  representing  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  and  America,  and 
views  of  Paris,  Rome,  Calcutta,  Cairo,  London,  and  Buenos  Ayres.  The  Washington  frontispiece 
was  followed  by  two  cuts  for  the  Cottage  Bible,  also  published  by  James  Conner,  long  since,  I 
believe,  out  of  print.  Impressions  of  these,  the  Massacre  of  the  Innocents  and  Jacob's  Dream 
(the  latter  after  a picture  by  Washington  Allston),  drawn  on  the  wood  by  Adams  himself, — 
not  burnished  proofs,  but  prints  on  hard  paper  by  the  hand-press  (his  own  beautiful  printing), 
— I have  in  my  possession,  given  me  by  him.  His  own  collection  of  proofs,  and  many  blocks, 
were  lost  in  the  great  fire  of  1835.  The  cuts  for  the  Treasury  of  Knowledge  and  the  Cottage 
Bible  were  also  destroyed  by  fire  some  two  years  later. 

The  two  last-named  engravings  are  of  his  best,  if  not  his  very  best  work,  yet  unequalled 
in  this  country,  and  worthy  to  rank  beside  the  best  of  the  great  old  time  in  England.  Nothing 
more  sweet  or  tender  has  been  done  than  the  Dream:  the  figures  well  drawn;  the  distant 
angels  rendered  more  aerial  by  an  almost  imperceptible  white  line,  lightening  but  not  destroying 
the  first  cutting;  the  clouds  pure  in  line  and  fine  in  tone;  the  foreground  a rich  white  line; 
the  whole  cut  as  good  as  if  it  had  been  done  by  Thompson,  or  Branston,  whose  style  it  most 
resembles.  The  Massacre , after  Coignet,  also  drawn  by  himself,  a bolder  cut,  is  almost  if  not 
quite  as  good.  A little  figure  of  a soldier  coming  down  the  steps  is  cross-lined  so  finely  that  I 
did  not  at  first  observe  the  cross  work.  The  intention  had  been  simply  to  reduce  the  color,  to 
give  air  and  distance;  but  with  true  artist  feeling,  though  the  lines  were  not  to  be  seen,  he  had 
been  as  careful  with  them  as  with  the  first  cutting,  and  they  were  as  well  disposed  as  the  first 
and  in  harmony  with  them.  No  better  work,  I would  repeat,  than  these  two  cuts  has  been  done 
even  in  the  best  time  of  England.  Their  size  is  about  4.]-  X 3J  inches. 

Of  about  the  same  date,  I imagine,  is  a vase  that  I would  have  taken  for  Thompson’s  en- 
graving: I can  give  no  higher  praise.  A cut  of  Canute's  Reproof  \ and  a frontispiece  to  Evenings 
at  Home,  both  drawn  by  Chapman,  and  several  other  cuts  printed  on  a delicate  gray  ground, 
with  high  lights  of  white,  are  equally  beautiful  and  as  highly  finished.  A small  cut  of  Joshua 
commanding  the  sun  to  stand  still,  drawn  by  Chapman,  and  engraved  for  some  Scripture  story- 
book, deserves  especial  notice  for  the  daring  use  he  has  made  of  solid  black.  In  the  early 
part  of  1835  he  began  to  copy  a series  of  Bible  Illustrations  published  by  Seeley,  of  London, 
chiefly  landscapes  about  the  size  of  an  octavo  page,  engraved  by  Thompson,  S.  Williams, 
Orrin  Smith,  Powis,  and  others.  Some  eight  of  these  were  transferred  and  engraved  by  him. 
One  copied  from  Powis,  one  of  Powis’s  best  landscapes  (no  man  then  engraved  better  land- 
scapes), is  so  exact  to  the  original,  even  in  character  and  value  and  vigor  of  line,  as  to  be 
easily  mistaken  for  it.  He  was  to  engrave  the  whole  series,  but  was  prevented  by  the  sudden 
death  of  his  employer.  The  eight  were,  I believe,  afterwards  published  along  with  the  originals 
of  the  remainder  of  the  series  (by  arrangement  with  the  London  house)  by  Van  Nostrand  & 
Dwight,  of  New  York.  I would  also  note  a landscape,  of  his  own  putting  on  the  wood,  from 
an  oil-painting  by  Morse,  the  first  President  of  the  National  Academy,  which  in  its  clearness 
and  purity  of  line  reminds  me  again  of  Powis. 

One  other  of  his  principal  works  is  the  Last  Arroiv,  engraved  in  1837  for  the  New  York 
Mirror,  and  afterwards  printed  (Mr.  Lossing  tells  me)  in  the  Family  Magazine.  The  drawing  is 
by  Chapman  : the  subject  is  the  pursuit  of  an  Indian  by  some  settlers,  — the  Indian,  on  a rock 


14 


ADAMS 


Part  of  Page  Border. 

From  Harper’s  Illuminated  Bible. 

be.  There  is  none  of 
landscape  illustrations 
Robert  Roberts,  or  of 


in  the  foreground,  aiming  his  last  arrow  at  his  enemies;  a woman  with 
a child  in  her  arms  is  at  his  feet.  The  size  of  this  engraving  is  X 
4|  inches.  It  is  bolder  in  treatment  than  the  Jacob's  Dream:  the  two 
I consider  his  best  productions.  I have  an  impression  given  me  by 
Mr.  Adams,  and  he  has  a proof  of  it.  I know  not  where  else  it  may 
be  seen,  except  badly  printed  in  the  New  York  Mirror , or  in  Vol.  VI. 
of  the  Family  Magazine , wherever  those  obsolete  works  may  yet  be 
preserved.  Proofs  and  blocks  burned,  there  is  little  to  be  got  at,  unless 
by  chance  at  some  old  bookstore,  by  which  the  real  worth  and  extent 
of  his  work  can  be  fairly  estimated.  As  in  the  case  of  Anderson, 
scarcely  anything  is  accessible  even  to  the  most  perseveringly  curious. 
Besides  himself  I have  found  but  one  man  having  any  proofs  of  his 
cuts.  To  him,  an  engraver,  of  Hartford,  Mr.  S.  H.  Clark,  I am  indebted 
for  sight  of  some  things  of  which  even  Adams  has  not  impressions. 
More  may  be  scattered  here  and  there,  and  copies  may  yet  exist  of  the 
Treasury  of  Knowledge  and  the  Cottage  Bible ; but  who  can  tell  where? 
He  is  to  be  known  now  only  by  the  cuts  in  the  Bible  published  by 
Messrs.  Harper. 

This  was  projected  in  1837,  at  a time  when  he  wanted  employment 
for  his  pupils.  He  thought  that  an  octavo  Bible,  with  a number  of 
small  illustrations,  would  command  a sale ; and  for  this  he  took  trans- 
fers of  some  forty  English  cuts  after  designs  by  Martin,  Westall,  and 
others.  These  engraved,  it  appeared  worth  while  to  add  to  the  number. 
So  the  project  grew;  and,  being  taken  hold  of  by  the  Harpers,  resulted 
in  the  larger  quarto  edition  so  well  known,  which  yet  keeps  its  ground 
as  the  best  illustrated  American  Bible.  Its  first  appearance  was  in  1843; 
and  it  has  retained  to  the  present  day  its  original  form,  “ embellished 
with  sixteen  hundred  historical  engravings  by  J.  A.  Adams,  more  than 
fourteen  hundred  of  which  are  from  original  designs  by  J.  G.  Chapman.” 
The  exceptions  are  the  transfers  before  mentioned,  square  cuts,  for 
which,  when  the  intended  size  was  enlarged,  Chapman  drew  a set  of 
elaborately  ornamented  borders ; and  the  half-page  landscape  vignettes, 
also  transferred  or  copied,  from  cuts  after  Harvey,  these  last  better 
engraved  than  the  bordered  cuts,  as  copies  from  better  originals  might 
Adams’s  own  work  in  these  transfers;  and  the  numerous  small  figure  and 
by  Chapman  are  all  from  the  hands  of  his  pupils,  John  Gordon  and 
other  engravers  employed  by  him,  — as  may  be  expected,  of  very  unequal 


From  Harper’s  Illuminated  Bible. 


meiit,  done  under  his  direction  only,  with  perhaps  here  and  there  some  manual  assistance  in 
touching  correction  of  drawing  or  improvement  in  tone  or  effect.  All  actually  and  entirely  of 
his  own  work  are  the  frontispieces  and  titles  to  the  Old  and  New  Testaments,  the  initial  headings 


■r'o  yt 


ADAMS 


15 


Engraving  by  J.  A.  Adams.  — Heading  to  Matthew. 

From  Harper’s  Illuminated  Bible. 

to  the  first  chapters  of  Genesis  and  Matthew,  the  ornamen- 
tal page  borders  (except  those  of  the  Family  Records), 
and  Chapman’s  borders  to  the  square  transfers  before 
spoken  of.  Through  the  courtesy  of  Messrs.  Harper,  I 
am  able  to  give  specimens  of  the  Master,  as  well  as  of 
the  general  character  of  the  fourteen  hundred  small  cuts. 
Of  these  I can  but  regretfully  say  that  the  electrotypes 
are  only  an  insufficient  and  unfair  representation.  Yet 
more  have  I to  regret  the  impossibility  of  proving  by 
even  any  reproduction  of  the  engravings  the  justice  of 
such  praise  as  I have  rendered  to  his  other  works. 

The  firm,  honest  exactness  and  clearness  of  Adams’s 
work,  executed  with  thorough  knowledge  of  and  as  thor- 
ough adaptation  to  the  needs  of  printing,  is  plain  here  as 
in  the  engravings  I have  previously  described;  and  if  we 
miss  somewhat  of  the  variety  of  line  and  richness  of  color  and  tone  which  I have  claimed  as 
belonging  to  his  other  works,  that  is  certainly  attributable  to  Chapman,  whose  precise  and 
mechanical  drawing,  in  formal  imitation  of  copperplate,  every  line,  however  delicate,  set  down 
with  perfect  distinctness,  required  an  almost  slavish  following,  which  must  have  sorely  tried  the 
patience  of  the  engraver.  In  objecting,  however,  to  this  style  of  mock  copperplate,  I must  not 
do  injustice  to  Chapman.  His  freest  drawings  were  very  beautiful.  I have  one  lying  before  me, 
the  initial  heading  for  the  first  page  of  some  child’s  book.  It  is  most  delicately,  yet  firmly 
drawn,  the  faintest  line  sharp  and  clean,  as  in  an  etching,  — only  some  little  light  tint  rubbed  in 
in  the  background.  It  would  furnish  an  excellent  lesson  for  the  but  too  often  hasty  and  sloppy 
draughtsman,  a sufficient  answer  to  those  who  would  speak  slightingly  of  “ only  a draughtsman 
on  wood.”  Drawing,  engraving,  and  printing  were  all  marvels  at  the  time  of  this  book’s  pro- 
duction; and  it  well  deserved  the  popularity  it  immediately  obtained,  and  which  it  yet  holds.  It 
has  a special  value  for  the  student  of  American  engraving. 

In  our  judgment  of  Mr.  Adams,  as  of  Dr.  Anderson,  the  difficulties  he  encountered,  not  only 
in  his  first  essays  in  engraving,  but  when  he  had  reached  his  full  success,  must  be  borne  in 
mind.  When  his  Bible  went  to  press,  he  had  to  prepare  (technically,  to  overlay)  his  own  blocks. 
There  was  no  printer  capable  of  that.  Certain  improvements,  yet  in  use,  in  the  press  itself  are 
also  his  work.  He  was  the  first  electrotyper  in  this  country,  the  inventor  also  of  several  im- 
provements in  that  process.  And  to  him  engravers  are  indebted  (though  it  be  but  a question- 


1 6 


ADAMS 


able  indebtedness)  for  the  knowledge  of  how  to  transfer  a print  to  the  block,  to  save  the  trouble 
of  drawing,  or  to  procure  a perfect  fac-simile.  It  was  for  some  time  his  secret,  and  safe  in  his 

power,  sure  to  be  only  well  used,  not  employed  as  an  aid  to  idle  incompetence;  but  it  was 

stolen  from  one  of  his  pupils,  and  so  became  common,  to  the  depravation  of  those  who  used  it 
out  of  sheer  laziness  or  for  the  sake  of  cheapness,  and  to  the  injury  of  unfortunate  apprentices 

compelled  to  travel  in  such  fashion  (like  swimming  on  corks)  to  the  destruction  of  all  self- 

reliance.  Adams  was  an  artist,  — so  unharmed  by  any  process.  In  his  early  days  he  was  a con- 
scientious and  diligent  student,  drawing  from  casts  and  from  the  life,  knowing  well  that  only 
through  artistic  study  can  the  engraver  claim  to  be  considered  an  artist,  or  perfect  himself  in 
his  special  profession.  The  Bible  was  published  in  1843.  The  sale  was  such  that  his  share  of 
the  profits  gave  him  means  to  travel  and  a competence  for  life.  He  made  three  visits  to 
Europe,  and  was  there  altogether  eight  years.  Since  his  return,  his  inventive  genius  engaged  in 
other  matters,  the  world  of  Art  has  unfortunately  lost  him.  To  sum  up,  his  graver  drawing  is 
always  good,  and  in  the  mechanism  of  his  art,  in  the  disposition  and  perfection  of  lines,  his 
engraving  will  take  rank  beside  the  best  of  English  or  other  work.  I may  add  as  worthy  of 
remark,  that  his  printing  of  his  own  engravings  is  equal  to  the  best  of  any  time,  — better  than 
anything  to  be  obtained  at  the  present  day. 

Here  it  may  be  well  to  notice  some  special  differences  in  the  methods  of  procedure  of  our 
early  engravers.  Anderson  and  Adams  soon  found  the  advantage  of  having  the  drawing  fairly 
made  upon  the  wood,  which  left  them  free  to  invent  their  own  lines,  and  which  gave  even  to 
Anderson,  who  never  reached  the  originality  of  Adams,  a free-handedness  not  to  be  obtained 
by  their  first  process  of  engraving  upon  a blackened  block.  Adams’s  work  has  a distinguishing 
character  of  its  own.  Anderson,  though  his  admiration  for  Bewick  limited  his  range,  was  yet 
free-handed.  In  Bowen’s  work  what  we  find,  however  good,  is  neither  original  nor  free-handed. 
He  is  simply  a careful  copier:  owing  to  the  fact  that  he  never  departed  from  the  first  method 
of  working.  In  1831,  some  years  after  Adams,  following  the  example  of  Anderson,  had  begun 
to  make  his  drawings  upon  the  wood,  Bowen  was  still  engraving  on  the  black  block:  perhaps 
easier  to  him,  in  so  much  as  it  was  similar  to  the  process  of  copper-engraving,  — to  his  practice 
in  which  also  much  of  his  excellence  may  be  attributed.  I had  difficulty  in  being  convinced 
that  his  work  was  not  altogether  from  transfers,  till  assured  to  the  contrary  by  Mr.  Mallory. 
He  writes  to  me  of  the  Young  Lady's  Book:  “All  the  cuts  were  done  on  a black  ground; 
and  all  that  was  done  in  Boston  was  executed  in  that  way.”  “ In  working  on  the  black  ground 
the  copy  was  reversed  by  a mirror,  and  constantly  under  the  engraver’s  eyes.”  Mr.  Crossman 
and  Mr.  Kilburn  (with  Mr.  Mallory  pupils  of  Bowen)  confirm  his  account  of  the  then  usual 
procedure.  General  outlines  being  traced,  the  engraver  had  but  to  closely  follow,  line  by 
line,  the  original  before  him,  — a method  insuring  mechanical  exactness,  but  fatal  to  the  indi- 
viduality of  genius,  fatal  to  anything  to  be  called  art.  Adherence  to  such  a course  accounts 
for  Bowen’s  inferiority  to  Adams  and  Anderson.  He  was,  however,  a notable  man,  not  only  for 
his  own  work,  so  qualified,  but  also  for  the  pupils  who  came  from  him,  — Hartwell,  the  brothers 
Devereux,  Greenough,  Croome,  Childs,  Crossman,  Mallory,  and  Kilburn  (the  last  three  yet 
living).  George  Loring  Brown,  the  painter,  and  Hammatt  Billings,  the  architect,  began  life  also 
as  wood-engravers  with  him. 


CHAPTER  III 


NGRAVING  on  type-metal,  and  occasionally  on  brass,  in  relief  for 
letter-press  printing  has  been  practised  for  many  years  in  the 
United  States;  and  is  often  as  well  executed  as  are  wooden 
cuts,  for  the  same  purpose,  on  the  other  side  of  the  Atlantic. 
So  writes  Isaiah  Thomas  in  his  History  of  Printing , dated  1810. 
I take  note  of  it,  because  in  the  course  of  my  inquiries  I have 
stumbled  upon  a little  book,  “with  nearly  five  hundred  cuts,'' 
published  by  this  same  Thomas,  at  Worcester,  Mass.,  in  1788: 
five  years  before  Anderson’s  first  attempts  on  wood.  The  title 
of  the  book  is  as  follows: — A Curious  Hieroglyphick  Bible;  or 
select  Passages  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  represented  with 
Emblematical  Figures , for  the  Amusement  of  Youth,  designed  chiefly  to  familiarize  tender  Age  in 
a pleasing  and  diverting  Manner  with  early  Ideas  of  the  Holy  Scriptures : the  first  Worcester 
Edition.  It  is  impossible  to  say  with  certainty  whether  these  “cuts”  (generally  about  an  inch 
square,  frontispiece  and  some  few  larger)  are  on  wood  or  not.  But  they  are  so  rude  that  they 
might  easily  have  been  done  upon  type-metal.  The  book  is  a reproduction  of  an  English  work. 
The  “first  Worcester  edition”  does  not  prove  that  it  was  printed  at  Worcester,  while  it  does 
imply  an  earlier  appearance  elsewhere.  Thomas  speaks  of  books  sent  to  England  to  be  printed  ; 
and  this  may  have  been  printed  there,  even  with  the  American  title-page.  Without  further 
evidence  I hold  to  Dr.  Anderson’s  right  to  be  considered  the  first  engraver  on  wood  in  America. 
No  less  the  Hieroglyphick  Bible  demanded  a passing  notice.  I resume  the  course  of  my  history. 

JOHN  H.  Hall,  born  at  Cooperstown,  New  York,  “Anderson’s  third  pupil”  (I  suppose 
taking  some  few  lessons  from  him  — else  self-taught),  began  engraving  in  1826,  afterwards  prac- 
tising at  Albany,  and  in  1830  finding  employ- 
ment with  the  firm  of  Carter,  Andrews,  & Co., 
at  Lancaster,  Mass.,  whence  he  removed  to  New 
York.  I find  his  best  engraving  in  a Manual  of 
the  Ornithology  of  the  United  States  and  Canada, 
by  Thomas  Nuttall,  published  by  Hilliard,  Gray, 

& Co.,  Boston.  The  date  of  the  first  edition  I do 
not  know;  the  second  is  1840.  I have  before 
me,  in  a book  lent  to  me  by  Mr.  Mallory,  proofs 
of  these  cuts  bearing  date  of  1832-3.  Some 
of  them,  drawn  in  pencil  by  Hall  himself,  are 
copies  from  Bewick  or  from  Wilson’s  Ornithol- 
ogy ; some  were  drawn  from  nature  by  William 
Croome.  The  two  specimens  here  given  (though 


HALL  — CROOME  — DEVEREUX 


18 


From  the  “Manual  of  Ornithology. — By  Hall. 


but  poorly  phototyped  from  badly  printed  im- 
pressions) may  still  serve  to  show  the  character 
of  these  cuts:  done  in  the  manner  of  Ander- 
son,— the  white  line  of  Bewick,  — and,  I think, 
in  every  respect  as  good  as  Anderson’s,  — of 
greater  merit  in  so  far  as  Hall’s  engraving  of 
Croome’s  drawings  had  to  be  of  his  own  in- 
vention. He  did  good  work  also  for  the  Smith- 
sonian Institute  at  Washington.  From  Mr.  Mal- 
lory’s book  I am  able  to  give  two  other  small 
cuts:  the  copy  of  one  of  Bewick’s  tail-pieces,  and 
a reduction  from  a cut  by  Bonner,  drawn  by 
Harvey.  I note  also  some  copies,  dated  1834,  of 
cuts  by  S.  Williams,  very  true  to  the  peculiarities 
of  the  master.  In  1849,  stricken  with  the  gold- 
fever,  Hall  went  to  California,  and  died  there. 

WILLIAM  CROOME  was  a pupil  of  Bowen. 
His  engraving  is  of  the  same  character  as  Hall’s. 
In  the  Mallory  book  are  a few  fair  copies  from 
Harvey  (cuts  by  Jackson,  I think)  ; some  cuts 
from  drawings  by  Tisdale  and  Johnston;  very 
many  of  his  own  drawing:  cuts  of  fables,  ani- 
mals, landscapes,  figures,  etc.,  very  little  inferior 
to  the  generality  of  Hall’s  work.  Later  in  life 
he  gave  his  time  to  designing  for  bank-notes. 
He  drew  well  on  the  wood,  and  is  said  to  have 
been  a good  painter  in  water-colors. 

In  this  same  Mallory  collection  also  I find  proofs,  bearing 
dates  from  1830  to  1835,  °f  cuts  by  Ezra  Atherton  (copies 
from  Bewick,  Harvey,  and  others)  ; by  Alonzo  Hartwell,  said 
to  have  been  the  best  of  Bowen’s  pupils,  but  the  cuts  here 
not  answering  to  that;  by  Fairchild  of  Hartford,  Alden, 
Wright,  Greenough,  and  Minot  (none  requiring  particular 
notice)  ; and  by  George  Loring  Brown,  the  painter,  whose 
engraving  seems  to  have  been  not  below  the  average  of  his 
contemporaries,  with  some  promise  of  possible  later  excel- 
lence. In  1832  he  went  to  Paris,  and  worked  for  a while  on 
the  Musee  de  Famillc.  Few  engravers  were  there  then:  the 
best,  Charles  Thompson,  brother  of  John.  Some  cuts  by 
G.  Thomas  Devereux,  also  in  the  Mallory  collection,  should 
not  be  disregarded:  two  or  three,  engraved  (Mr.  Mallory 

informs  me)  on  the  black  block,  very  accurately  and  with 
much  feeling,  copied  from  cuts  in  the  second  series  of  North- 
cote’s  Fables  (London,  1833);  and  a large  cut  (here  given) 
after  Thurston  and  William  Hughes,  which,  whether  on  a 
black  block  or  from  a transfer,  has  almost  as  rich  a line  as 
che  original  (however  feebly  represented  here),  and  is  nearly 
as  good  as  the  best  work  of  Anderson  himself.  I ought  not  to  omit,  against  my  own  depre- 
ciation of  Hartwell,  that  in  1850  he  received  the  silver  medal  of  the  Massachusetts  Charitable 
Mechanics’  Institution,  for  the  best  specimen  of  engraving  on  wood.  I do  not  know  who  were 
his  judges  or  who  his  competitors.  I go  back  again  to  1829. 


After  Bewick.  — By  Hall. 


After  Bonner.  — By  Hall. 


Drawn  and  Engraved  by  Croome. 


AND  OTHER  EARLY  ENGRAVERS 


19 


After  William  Hughes.  — By  G.  T.  Devereux  (1835). 


In  this  year  Joseph  Andrews,  an  engraver  on  copper,  also  a pupil  of  Bowen,  joined  the  firm 
of  Carter,  Andrews  (his  brother),  & Co.,  already  in  business  at  Lancaster,  Mass.,  as  printers 
and  binders;  and  so  began  there  an  establishment  for  engraving  and  general  book-work.  Peter 
Parley  was  then  having  a wide  circulation,  the  books  all  illustrated,  more  or  less.  Hall  came 
to  work  in  the  house;  Atherton,  Mallory,  Minot,  were  taken  as  pupils;  Croome  was  employed 
as  designer.  Others,  draughtsmen  and  engravers,  Nutting,  O’Brien,  Worcester,  joined  afterwards. 
So  many  as  fourteen  engravers,  on  wood  and  copper,  were  at  one  time  employed,  — so  many 
as  seventy  hands  in  all,  type-founders,  stereotypers,  printers,  bookbinders,  &c. : till  the  establish- 
ment failed  and  broke  up  during  a financial  panic  in  1833. 

In  1834  Bowen,  Hartwell,  and  John  C.  Crossman  formed  the  “American  Engraving  and 
Printing  Co.,”  afterwards  altering  their  style  and  obtaining  a charter  of  incorporation  as  a joint- 
stock  company  under  the  name  of  the  “ Boston  Bewick  Co.”  Mallory,  Croome,  and  others,  joined 
them.  They  published  the  American  Magazine , of  similar  character  to  the  London  Penny 
Magazine,  of  which  at  that  time  two  editions  were  in  course  of  republication  in  this  country,  — 
one  in  New  York  from  imported  plates,  one  in  Boston  with  re-engraved  cuts  by  B.  F.  and  J.  J. 
Greenough.  The  two  volumes  of  the  American  Magazine  contain  some  five  hundred  illustrations, 
poor  in  execution  and  coarse.  In  1836  the  company’s  premises  were  burnt  down,  and  the 
company  failed.  “There  was,”  writes  Mr.  Mallory  (to  whom  I am  indebted  for  information  as 
to  these  experiments),  “another  dispersion  of  the  engravers”;  new  combinations  and  arrange- 
ments,— some  removing,  others  quitting  the  business  altogether. 

In  1829  (again  looking  back)  Abraham  J.  Mason  of  London,  a man  of  some  versatility 
and  a good  engraver,  came  to  New  York,  well  introduced  by  Lord  Brougham  and  others  to 
scientific  and  professional  Americans.  His  work,  though  wanting  the  power  of  his  master, 
Branston,  was  refined,  and  likely  to  attract  notice.  In  1830  the  National  Academy  of  Design, 


20 


STATE  OF  THE  ART 


perhaps  moved  by  his  introductions,  paid  him  the  compliment  of  electing  him  as  an  Associate; 
and  afterwards  appointed  him  their  Professor  of  Wood-Engraving,  — a professorship  which  did 
not  result  in  much,  notwithstanding  the  delivery  of  a course  of  lectures  on  the  art.  Listeners, 

I should  think,  were  not  numerous,  however  novel  the  subject:  I count  six  or  seven  engravers 
at  that  time  in  New  York.  Still,  though  he  in  his  business  of  engraving  found  so  little  employ- 
ment that,  even  with  the  aid  of  a bookstore,  in  Canal  Street,  he  was  unable  to  command  a 
sufficient  income,  and  so  after  ten  years’  endeavor  returned  to  England,  in  the  spring  of  1839, 
the  prominent  if  not  profitable  position  accorded  to  him  may  have  led  to  some  increase  of 
interest  in  the  art,  and  given  some  impulse  to  it.  But  there  was  yet  too  little  work  for 
the  workmen,  and  that  was  of  not  very  artistic  character.  Mr.  T.  W.  Strong,  the  publisher, 
who  began  life  as  an  engraver,  has  told  me  some  anecdotes  which  may  serve  to  show  the  con- 
dition of  engraving  at  this  period.  On  one  occasion  a man  came  all  the  way  from  St.  Louis 
and  stayed  at  the  Astor  House  till  such  time  as  his  work  (some  show-card  or  label  for  a new 
medicine)  could  be  done  for  him  to  take  home  with  him.  On  another,  the  drawing  on  the  wood 
being  sent  for  approval,  they  ran  the  unengraved  block  through  the  press,  and  were  utterly 
astonished  at  obtaining  only  a black  result.  Surely  Mason’s  lectures  might  have  been  wanted. 

“ So  limited  was  the  demand  for  wood-engravings  in  this  country  down  to  the  time  when  Mr. 
Mason  returned  to  England,”  writes  Lossing,  “ that  when,  late  in  the  year  1838,  I engaged  in 
the  vocation  in  this  city  (New  York),  Dr.  Anderson,  Mr.  Lansing,  and  his  son,  Mr.  Adams, 
B.  F.  Childs,  and  R.  N.  White  (who  was  also  a good  draughtsman),  were  the  only  engravers 
here.  Mr.  Bowen  and  his  pupil  Hartwell  ” [not  a few  others  also,  as  already  shown]  “ were 
yet  practising  the  art  at  Boston;  and  Gilbert  was  engraving  in  Philadelphia.  Linton  Thorne 
and  William  D.  Redfield,  young  engravers  in  New  York,  had  lately  died”  [Linton  Thorne  must 
have  been  alive  at  that  date.  It  was  certainly  later  than  1838  when  a bright  pleasant  fellow  of 
that  name  called  upon  me  in  London],  “and  the  elder  Lansing  and  also  Morgan  were  just 
withdrawing  from  the  business.  The  younger  Lansing  then  engraved  only  the  large  coarse 
theatre-bills,  using  mahogany  for  that  purpose.”  Joseph  W.  Morse,  at  that  time  with  Strong, 
was,  I believe,  the  first  who  engraved  these  on  pine  with  an  open  graver,  about  1840;  and 
Strong  first  produced  them,  from  designs  by  George  Thomas,  in  combination  of  colors. 

“ My  first  acquaintance  with  the  art  of  wood-engraving,”  writes  to  me  an  American  friend 
who  has  made  his  mark  both  as  draughtsman  and  engraver,  “ dates  back  to  the  beginning  of 
my  apprenticeship  in  1843,”  the  date  of  the  copyright  of  Harpers’  (Adams  and  Chapman’s) 
Bible.  “Little  use  before  then  had  been  found  for  engraving”  (he  is  speaking  of  New  York) 
“ beyond  illustrating  some  new  invention,  some  improvement  in  the  thousand  and  one  articles 
of  household  use,  or  farming  utensils,  or  machinery;  or  in  counterfeiting  foreign  labels  for 
perfumery,  and  for  one  thing  or  other  that  would  not  sell  except  as  foreign  produce.  Gradually 
the  practice  of  having  English  wood-cuts  recut  was  introduced  by  daring  publishers,  who  thus 
reproduced  the  foreign  book  at  a greatly  reduced  price,  and,  it  must  be  acknowledged,  in  a very 
inferior  manner,  both  in  the  engraving  (generally  the  work  of  apprentices)  and  in  the  printing, 
at  that  time  at  as  low  an  ebb  as  the  engraving.  After  a time  the  publishers  began  to  put  in 
their  books  an  occasional  attractive  frontispiece;  sometimes  even  two  or  three  additional  cuts, 
generally  transferred  from  English  engravings,  though  already  there  were  artists  drawing  on 
wood,  — certainly  in  an  inferior  manner.  Nevertheless  it  was  a beginning,  and  illustrated  books 
were  preferred.  I recollect  the  remark  of  a publisher,  of  the  conservative  type,  as  he  handed 
to  me  a couple  of  duodecimo-page  cuts  to  carry  to  my  employer,  to  be  transferred  and  re- 
engraved for  a book  he  was  about  to  publish,  — that  he  supposed  ‘ he  would  have  to  do  them,  as 
people  now-a-days  would  not  buy  a book  unless  there  were  pictures  in  it.’  The  two  cuts  were 
to  cost  the  enormous  sum  of  twenty-five  or  twenty-eight  dollars,  I forget  which,  drawing  and 
engraving  of  the  two;  and  the  enterprising  publisher  seemed  to  feel  that  the  outlay,  merely  to 
gratify  a new  popular  whim,  was  a great-  waste  of  money.  The  leading  house  in  those  days 


Engraved  by  Whitney. 

From  “The  Child’s  Paper.'’  Published  by  the  American  Tract  Society. 


IN  THE  FIRST  HALF  OF  THE  CENTURY  21 


was  that  of  Harper  Brothers.  They  published  a series  of  English  Poets , the  reissue  of  a series 
on  the  other  side : well  engraved  there,  here  reproduced  by  apprentices  in  such  fashion  as  you 
can  easily  imagine,  — perhaps  as  good  as  the  prices  then  paid  for  such  things.  Then  came  the 
publication  of  Adams’s  Bible : a wonder  for  its  fine  engravings  and  beauty  of  printing,  issued  in 


Engraved  by  Annin. 

From  “The  Child's  Paper.”  Published  by  the  American  Tract  Society. 


22  AMERICAN  TRACT  SOCIETY 

the  finest  style  possible  at  that  da)/.  It  was  a great  success.  Erom  this  date  we  may  reckon 
the  rise  of  wood-engraving  in  this  country.” 

About  this  time,  prominent  in  New  York  as  engravers,  after  Anderson  and  Adams,  were 
B.  F.  Childs,  E.  Bookhout,  A.  Kinnersley,  William  Howland,  (all  of  whom  worked  on  Adams’s 
Bible,)  beside  J.  H.  Hall  and  his  pupil,  N.  Orr.  There  were  others,  also,  of  less  account. 
Darlev  now  came  to  the  front,  with  his  designs  for  Washington  Irving.  About  this  period,  too, 
came  an  English  immigration,  — Alfred  Bobbett,  John  Andrew,  and  Robert  Carter  (known  here 
as  Frank  Leslie),  — to  stir  the  native  engravers  to  more  activity.  Then  the  American  Tract 
Society  took  a new  departure.  Unknown  as  a publishing  house,  except  for  tracts  and  religious 
books,  a few  for  the  young  illustrated  with  cheap  cuts,  wretchedly  printed,  they  now  launched 
out  more  widely;  bought  better  presses,  obtained  artistic  management,  and  aimed  at  better 
work.  The  general  quality  of  wood-engraving  began  to  improve  as  the  demand  for  it  increased. 
A notable  alteration  took  place  in  the  style  of  work.  If  there  was  nothing  to  equal  the  freedom 
of  handling  and  boldness  of  Anderson’s  best  white  line,  or  of  so  high  and  perfect  a character 
as  in  Adams’s  engravings,  there  was  a bettering  of  the  general  quality:  a care  for  purity 
and  delicacy  of  line,  a clearness  in  fac-simile,  and  an  attention  to  tone  as  well  as  smoothness 
of  tints,  which,  helped  by  the  improvement  in  printing,  placed  the  cuts  for  the  Tract  Society’s 


Engraved  by  Childs.  — Drawn  by  Herrick. 

From  “The  Child’s  Paper.”  Published  by  the  American  Tract  Society. 


> 

KINNERSLEY  — ANNIN  — HAYES  — ETC.  23 

publications  very  much  beyond  the  mass  of  earlier  work,  and  on  a fair  level  with  average 
English  work  of  that  same  period.  Much  of  this  was  no  doubt  due  to  the  study  and  imitation 
of  English  engraving,  much  also  to  Adams’s  example.  Gilbert’s  drawings,  too,  seem  to  have 
helped  towards  this  result.  Some  of  them,  especially  some  engraved  by  Childs  and  Whitney, 
will  bear  comparison  with  anything  of  the  kind  in  the  old  country.  Whitney’s  engraving 
(he  was  and  is  designer  also,  but  my  business  here  is  with  the  engraver)  is,  I should  say, 
the  best  of  that  class.  The  average  work  of  Childs  perhaps  comes  next ; but,  indeed,  there 
is  a pretty  even  quality  running  through  the  productions  of  Childs,  Whitney,  Herrick,  Kin- 
nersley,  Annin,  Hayes,  Richardson,  Bookhout,  the  elder  Bogert,  Jocelyn,  Bross,  Bobbett,  and 
Edmonds,  whose  names  I find  in  the  many  children’s  books  published  by  the  Society:  their 
work  all  fine,  careful,  generally  good,  but  timid,  and  very  much  dependent  on  the  draughtsman; 
the  general  family  likeness  owing  perhaps  partly  to  that,  partly  also  to  imitation  of  the  style 
of  engraving  at  that  time  in  vogue  in  England.  Some  of  this  monotony,  as  well  as  of  the 
improvement,  might  be  also  due  to  the  influence  of  Childs,  who  in  1850,  on  the  death  of  R. 
Roberts,  took  charge  of  the  engraving  department  of  the  Tract  Society.  I find  it  difficult, 
unhelped  by  names,  to  distinguish  the  work  done  for  the  Society;  and,  looking  through  the 
Child's  Paper , begun  under  the  same  direction  in  1852,  I trace  the  same  hands,  the  same  general 
ability,  the  same  characteristics,  — except  as  regards  fineness,  the  paper  requiring  a larger  — I 


Engraved  by  Kinnersley.  — Drawn  uy  Herrick. 

From  “'Flic  Child’s  Paper.”  Published  by  the  American  Tr.ict  Society. 


24 


CHILDS 


can  hardly  say  a bolder  — treatment.  I select,  as  favorable  examples,  with  richer  and  bolder 
handling  than  usual,  two  cuts  (1852),  Peace  and  War , by  Whitney  and  Annin,  — Annin’s  I think 
the  better;  and  some  birds  by  Childs  and  Kinnersley  (1862),  drawn  by  H.  W.  Herrick  (designer 
and  engraver),  — feathery  and  with  a good  graver-drawn  line,  not  so  much  like  to  Bewick  as  to 
Powis,  a later  English  engraver.  Childs’s,  as  will  be  seen,  is  the  more  refined;  Kinnersley’s 
firmer,  good  solid  work.  Coming  down  to  recent  times,  I may  take  a small  cut  by  Hayes,  from 

the  Women  of  the  Bible  (American  Tract  Society,  1868),  as  specimen  of  the  Society’s  best  work. 

The  later  issues  of  the  Tract  Society  are  so  mixed,  from  the  constantly  increasing  use  of  trans- 
fers and  electrotypes  of  foreign  cuts,  that,  even  if  there  were  more  to  deserve  notice  in  them,  it 

would  be  impossible  to  keep  track  of  American  work.  It  has  been  convenient  to  follow  the 

whole  course  of  the  Tract  Society,  owing  to  which  some  of  the  cuts  here  given  are  of  a com- 
paratively recent  date;  but  the  choice  was  fair  as  regards  the  engravers  themselves,  and  they  are 
not  less  characteristic  of  the  earlier  times,  thirty  years  ago,  of  which  Hall  (already  spoken  of), 
Childs,  and  Whitney  may  be  taken  as  representatives. 

Benjamin  F.  Childs,  born  at  Cambridgeport,  Mass.,  in  1814,  apprenticed  to  his  brother 
(with  Henry  Kinnersley  and  Joseph  W.  Morse),  afterwards  with  Alonzo  Hartwell,  of  Boston, 
began  business  in  New  York  in  1838.  " I have  seen  his  work  so  far  back  as  1843,  from  Darley’s 
designs.  It  shows,  as  before  noticed,  considerable  technical  advance  on  what  I find  of  previous 

work,  — again  excepting  that  by 
Adams.  In  1850,  on  the  death 
of  R.  Roberts,  Childs  took  his 
place  as  superintendent  of  en- 
graving for  the  Tract  Society ; 
and  both  by  his  attention  to 
printing  and  by  his  capacity  as 
an  engraver  seems  to  have  been 
mainly  instrumental  in  improv- 
ing the  appearance  of  their 
books,  and  in  directing  and  en- 
couraging the  greater  careful- 
ness in  engraving.  “ I knew 
Mr.  Childs,”  says  a contempo- 
rary well  able  to  give  judgment 
concerning  him,  “ when  he  was 
a young  man.  He  was  then 
distinguished  for  industrious 
habits,  drawing  with  his  friend 
O’Brien  at  the  National  Acad- 
emy at  night,  and  trying  his 
hand  at  other  times  in  water- 
colors  and  crayons.  He  was 
an  enthusiastic  student  of  the 
English  school  of  book  illus- 
tration of  that  period  ” : unfor- 
tunately a period  rather  of  deli- 
cate manipulation  than  of  ar- 
tistic vigor.  “ The  engravers 
of  his  time  universally  accorded 
Engraved  by  Ch(lds.  — Drawn  by  Darley.  him  the  foremost  rank;  and 

From  “ Knickerbocker’s  History  of  New  York.”  j.  b.  Lippincott  & Co.  his  influence  on  those  working 


WHITNEY 


25 


for  him  was  such  that  his  criticisms  developed  a 
degree  of  refinement  and  excellence  in  others  that 
eventually  surpassed  his  own.  The  best  American 
engravers  of  to-day  are  such  as  received  their  im- 
pulse directly,  or  indirectly  through  others,  from 
him.”  He  died  in  1863.  The  best  engraving  I 
can  find  of  his  is  that  given  on  the  opposite 
page,  drawn  by  Darley,  from  Knickerbocker  s His- 
tory of  New  York,  Wiley  & Putnam,  New  York, 
1852. 

Elias  J.  Whitney,  a pupil  of  E.  Bookhout, 
on  the  death  of  Childs  took  his  place  in  the  Tract 
Society.  His  engraving  is  generally  superior  to 
that  of  Childs,  and  appears  to  me  the  best  of  all 
which  I may  call  early  work,  — work  before  1867. 
His  engraving  of  the  drawings  of  the  English  de- 
Engraved  by  Hayes.  signer,  Gilbert,  stands  beside  the  best  Gilbert  work 

From  “Women  of  the  Bible.”  Published  by  the  American  Tract  Society.  jn  England;  and  is,  I think,  more  intelligent  as 

well  as  more  faithful  than  most  of  the  old  country  engraving.  I would  not  insult  him  by  any 
comparison  of  his  work  with  the  mass  of  that  put  out  with  the  name  of  Dalziel.  His  rendering 
of  Gilbert’s  best  drawmg  is  equal  to  the  best  of  Orrin  Smith’s  or  Gorway’s ; and  closer  to  the 
feeling  of  Gilbert’s  younger  and  less  careless  time.  The  general  character  of  Whitney’s  work  is 
shown  in  the  cut  here  given.  Gilbert  himself  writes:  “1  have  never  seen  engravings  from  my 
drawings  that  have  given  me  more  pleasure.”  Mr.  Whitney  is  still  manager  of  the  engraving 
department  of  the  American  Tract  Society;  but  the  Society  is  not,  artistically,  as  enterprising 
as  of  old,  — probably  finding  it  more  economical  to  import  electrotypes  and  exploit  new  pro- 
cesses, phototypic,  or  photogalvanic,  or  whatever 
they  may  be  called.  Nevertheless,  the  American 
Tract  Society  must  have  credit  for  what  it  did, 
in  the  teeth  of  prejudice,  at  a time  when  good 
printing  and  good  engraving  were  but  beginning. 

The  late  Mr.  Putnam  also  deserves  mention 
for  similar  venturous  liberality  in  those  younger 
days.  Irving’s  Sketch  Book , produced  by  him  in 
1852,  was  the  most  beautifully  got  up  book  that 
had  then  appeared:  paper,  printing,  and  margin, 
of  the  best  and  handsomest,  with  figure  designs 
by  Darley  and  Hoppin,  and  landscapes,  simple 
or  with  figures,  by  William  Hart,  Bellew,  and 
others,  — most,  if  not  all,  engraved  by  Richard- 
son. The  landscapes  have  more  of  tone  in  them 
than  had  been  usual  before;  the  figure  subjects 
are  clean  and  firm,  but  generally  poor  in  line, 
without  much  feeling  of  the  pencil.  A few  have 
more  color  and  a richer  line.  Some  minute  and 
very  delicate  outlines  will  also  be  found  here,  ex- 
cellently printed.  The  book  is  worth  referring  to 
for  these,  and  also  as  fairly  representing  Rich- 
ardson’s work.  Knickerbocker' s Histoty  of  New  Engraved  by  Whitney.  — Drawn  by  Gilbert. 
York,  of  the  same  date,  by  the  same  publisher,  From  “The  Child’s  Paper.”  Published  by  the  American  Tract  Society. 


2 6 


HERRICK  — HOWLAND  — ETC 


( both  books  now  the  property 
of  Messrs.  Lippincott,)  is  not 
so  handsomely  produced,  but 
has  larger  engravings  (from 
Darley’s  drawings),  by  Childs, 
Herrick,  Harley,  Richardson, 
Tossing  & Barrett  (Barrett’s,  I 
suppose),  J.  W.  Orr,  Orr  (N.) 
& Andrew,  and  Bobbctt  & 
Edmonds. 

In  1855,  referring  to  date 
of  copyright,  Messrs.  Harper 
published  Abbott’s  Life  of 
Napoleon  Bonaparte,  two  vol- 
umes, with  designs  by  Doepler, 
and  engravings  chiefly  by  J. 
W.  Orr,  Richardson  & Cox, 
Whitney,  Jocelyn  & Annin,  J. 
A.  Bogert,  Roberts,  and  Ed- 
monds : Orr’s  and  Richard- 

son’s perhaps  the  best.  The 
book  is  worth  notice,  not  for 
the  merit  of  the  individual  en- 
gravings, certainly  not  better 
than  the  average  work  of  the 
time,  but  for  the  number  of 
illustrations  given.  The  Put- 
nam books  and  this  Life  of 
Napoleon  Bonaparte  may  fairly 
be  considered  the  first  illus- 
Engraved  by  Herrick. — Drawn  by  Darley.  trated  books  (with  original 

From  “ Knickerbocker’s  History  of  New  York.”  J.  E.  Lippincott  & Co.  cuts),  after  the  Bible , that  ap- 

peared in  America:  the  Sketch  Book  most  remarkable  for  its  getting  up,  the  Knickerbocker  for 
the  excellence  of  the  engravings,  the  Napoleon  for  the  quantity  of  illustration.  I may  here  close 
the  record  of  what  may  be  called  the  earlier  engraving:  not  but  that  of  course  much  of  the 
same  character  continues  even  to  the  present  time,  many  of  the  engravers  I have  named  yet 
living  and  at  work  in  the  old  manner. 

Yet  I must  not  pass  unnoticed  the  American  Drazving-Book,  “a  manual  for  the  Amateur 
and  basis  of  study  for  the  professional  Artist,  by  J.  G.  Chapman,  N.  A.,”  published  in  1847  by 
J.  S.  Redfield,  of  New  York.  The  cuts,  so  far  as  I can  trace  names,  are  by  Kinnersley,  Herrick, 
Howland,  Wright,  A.  Bobbett,  Bookhout,  (there  may  be  others)  : heads,  feet,  hands,  some 
in  outline,  some  in  complicated  cross-line  like  copperplate,  some  small,  some  (heads,  hands, 
feet)  half  life-size.  Besides  these  there  are  trees  and  parts  of  trees,  leafage,  etc.  Say  they  are 
but  fac-simile,  and  purely  mechanical,  all  drawn  line  for  line  by  Chapman,  still  they  are  won- 
derfully well  cut,  as  clean  and  firm  as  if  engraved  on  steel:  it  is  the  very  perfection  of 

mechanism ; and  what  tints  there  are  are  equally  pure  and  clear.  There  is  a bit  of  scroll-work 
by  Howland  at  the  beginning  of  the  book  that  might,  with  the  beautiful  printing,  pass  for  steel. 
I know  no  other  book  like  this,  so  good,  so  perfect  in  all  it  undertakes. 


CHAPTER  IV 


N the  history  of  wood-engraving  in  America  we  cannot  omit  to 
notice  the  influence  of  illustrated  newspapers  and  magazines. 
The  earliest  in  the  country,  according  to  Lossing  ( Memorial 
of  Anderson),  was  a weekly  illustrated  sheet  called  the  Family 
Magazine,  of  which  the  first  number  appeared  in  April,  1833, 
published  in  New  York  by  Justus  S.  Redfield  (the  same  who 
published  Chapman’s  Drawing-Book),  a brother  of  the  engraver 
Redfield.  It  was,  says  Lossing,  “ wholly  and  profusely  illus- 
trated by  engravings  on  wood,”  and  “ held  the  field  almost 
without  a competitor  through  eight  annual  volumes,  issued  in 
monthly  parts.”  Adams’s  Last  Arrow,  writes  Lossing  to  me, 
“was  published  in  the  Family  Magazine.  He  had  just  com- 
pleted it  for  another  purpose,”  [for  the  New  York  Mirror, ] “ and  was  printing  it  with  a slightly 
tinted  ground,  in  the  autumn  of  1837,  when  I was  taking  a fortnight’s  lessons  of  him,  to  enable 
me  to  illustrate  a little  literary  work  I was  then  editing  at  Poughkeepsie,  New  York.”  In  1839, 
Lossing  himself  edited  the  Family  Magazine.  1 1 is  account  should,  therefore,  be  trustworthy, 

yet  is  not  altogether  correct.  The  New  York  Mirror  began  in  July,  1823,  and  at  the  close  of 

the  fifth  volume,  July  5,  1828,  I find  stated,  “Engravings  shall  be  continued  as  heretofore.” 
Vol.  VIII.,  1830-1,  has  a list  of  seven  engravings  on  wood,  poor  cuts  certainly,  but  engravings 
for  all  that;  Vol.  XIV.,  1836-7,  has  five  engravings  on  wood,  one  by  Adams,  the  Studious  Boy, 

after  a picture  by  Mount;  Vol.  XV.  has  no  fewer  than  twenty-one,  four  by  Adams,  including 

the  Last  Arrow,  his  best  work.  The  New  York  Mirror  clearly,  therefore,  antedates  the  Family 
Magazine  as  an  illustrated  paper;  and  the  “profusely  illustrated”  may  be  taken  with  some  salt. 
The  Mirror  also  is  a volume  “adorned  with  numerous  engravings”;  and  the  “almost  without 
a competitor”  from  1833  to  1840  will  not  stand  in  competition  with  the  fact  that  not  only  the 
New  York  Mirror , but  the  Boston  American  Magazine  and  two  reproductions  of  the  London 
Penny  Magazine,  had  existence  within  those  dates. 

Two  years  later  (1842)  the  only  illustrated  newspaper  in  New  York  [and  I believe  there 
was  none  elsewhere  in  the  country]  was  the  Sunday  Atlas,  illustrated  to  the  extent  of  a small 

portrait,  four  inches  square,  on  the  front  page  of  the  paper.  The  Mercury,  not  to  be  outdone, 

thereupon  embellished  its  Sunday  issue  with  a series  of  outlines  about  twice  the  size  of  the 
Atlas  cuts,  illustrating  a sort  of  travesty  of  a play,  “ Beauty  and  the  Beast,”  then  being  acted 
at  the  Bowery  Theatre.  The  character  of  these  cuts  may  be  judged  of  from  their  cost,  — from 

two  to  four  dollars  each.  I believe  the  Ilcrald  followed  suit,  indulging  in  an  occasional  embel- 

lishment. Then  there  was  a yearly  illustrated  broad  sheet  called  Brother  Jonathan . In  1843  a 
certain  Chevalier  Wykoff  started  his  Picture  Gallery,  a large  open  monthly  sheet  with  a few 
coarse  and  very  common  cuts.  This  lasted  only  some  three  months;  but  was  the  occasion  for 


28 


MAGAZINES  AND  NEWSPAPERS 


bringing  out  an  English  engraver,  George  Thomas,  so  well  known  afterwards  for  his  designs 
for  bank-notes,  before  he  returned  to  England  to  make  a reputation  as  draughtsman  on  the 
wood,  and  painter.  In  June,  1850,  Harper's  New  Monthly  Magazine  made  its  first  appearance, 
soon  followed  by  the  International  Magazine  (surely  an  unfortunate  name  in  those  days), 
published  by  Stringer  and  Townsend.  Godey's  Lady's  Book  and  Graham's  Magazine  had  also 
cuts  occasionally. 

The  first  volume  of  Harper  s New  Monthly  Magazine  bears  date  “ from  June  to  November, 
1 8^0.”  It  was  not  profusely  illustrated  at  first,  and  the  few  cuts  in  the  early  numbers,  by 
Lossing  and  Barrett,  are  very  poor  in  quality.  The  first  cut  in  the  Magazine,  a portrait  of 
Alison,  appears  at  page  134.  Two  other  portraits,  Macaulay  and  Prescott,  follow,  at  pages  136 
and  138.  A few  fashion  cuts  complete  the  illustration-list  of  No.  1.  No.  2 has  five  small 
landscapes  and  three  fashion  cuts.  No.  3 has  half  a dozen  cuts  copied  from  the  English  Art 
Journal ; a fair  portrait,  after  Brady,  of  Zachary  Taylor;  and  fashion  cuts.  By  the  time  we  reach 
Vol.  X.,  1854-5,  there  is  a tolerably  numerous  array  of  cuts,  by  the  old  hands  and  others: 
some  good  figure  subjects,  of  his  best,  by  Richardson;  and  neat  landscapes,  with  and  without 
figures,  by  John  Andrew,  Richardson,  Bobbett  & Hooper,  and  N.  Orr  & Co. ; some  good 
animals  also,  copied  I imagine  from  Harvey.  Thence  to  1871  the  engraving  preserves  a dead 
level.  The  Magazine  had  obtained  a sale  of  fifty  thousand  in  the  first  six  months.  I shall  have 
to  give  a special  notice  of  the  improvements  in  later  years. 

In  1851,  T.  W.  Strong,  engraver  and  publisher,  projected  the  first  American  illustrated  news- 
paper worthy  to  be  so  called.  Strong  had  been  a pupil  of  Elton,  but  had  been  taught  so  little 
during  his  pupilage,  that,  when  on  a visit  to  Paris  he  sought  employment  from  Ouartley  (an 
English  engraver  in  business  there),  his  specimens  were  only  laughed  at.  With  true  American 
pluck  he  asked  leave  to  practise  unpaid  in  the  atelier  of  Andrew,  Best,  & Co.,  and  so  worked 
till  they  were  glad  to  pay  and  desired  to  keep  him.  His  work,  honest  and  bold,  may  be  seen 
in  the  frontispiece  of  the  Illustrated  American  Nczvs,  drawn  by  Dallas,  the  first  number  of 
which  he  brought  out  on  the  7th  of  June,  1851.  The  drawings  for  the  paper  were  principally 
by  George  Thomas,  Wallin,  Hoppin,  Bellew,  and  Hitchcock;  the  engravings  by  Strong  himself, 
Anthony  (then  his  pupil),  the  Orrs  (N.  and  J.  W.),  and  two  newly  arrived  Englishmen,  “ Frank 
Eeslie  ” and  John  Andrew.  The  engravings  cannot  be  called  better,  or  much  worse,  than  the 
mass  of  “ engraving  ” done  at  the  present  day  for  cheap  newspapers.  The  attempt  continued 
for  only  a few  months,  the  last  number  appearing  on  the  12th  of  March,  1852. 

In  the  following  year  an  endeavor  to  revive  it  was  made  by  the  great  show-man,  Barnum, 
and  Beach  of  the  Sun.  This  second  Illustrated  News  of  New  York  lasted  from  the  1st  of 
January,  1853,  to  November  26th  of  the  same  year.  Failure  again.  The  cuts  were  much  like 
those  in  the  earlier  paper. 

Strong’s  failure  with  the  newspaper  had  taught  him  something  of  popular  requirements. 
Diogenes  — his  Lantern  was  brought  out  by  him,  making  a six  months’  volume,  from  January  to 
June,  1852,  edited  by  John  Brougham,  with  cuts  in  imitation  of  Punch  from  drawings  chiefly  by 
Bellew.  That  not  taking,  Strong  in  the  same  year  started  his  Yankee  Notions , which  reached  a 
sale  of  forty-seven  thousand,  and  was  profitable  to  the  enterprising  publisher  for  fifteen  years. 
McLenan  (a  designer  of  much  originality  and  spirit  and  a good  draughtsman),  Hoppin,  and 
Howard  drew  for  it;  Brougham  and  Artemus  Ward  wrote  in  it.  It  may  also  be  worth  telling,  in 
connection  with  the  Notions , that  Edison,  the  telephone  inventor,  began  life  under  its  auspices, 
hawking  it  for  sale.  The  success  of  the  Notions  prompted  Strong  to  another  imitation  of  Punch, 
— Yankee  Doodle  or  Young  America , — in  1856.  This  lived  but  six  months. 

Frank  Leslie's  Illustrated  Newspaper  came  out  in  December,  1855,  and  Harpers  Weekly 
Journal  of  Civilization  began  its  career  in  January,  1857.  An  unsuccessful  rival,  under  the 
conduct  of  Anthony,  with  drawings  by  Eytinge  and  Nast,  begun  in  November,  1859,  collapsed 
after  a few  months.  Gleason's  Pictorial,  in  Boston,  was  in  competition  with  these,  — followed  by 


HARPER’S  WEEKLY  JOURNAL  OF  CIVILIZATION 


29 


Ballou’s  illustrated  publications.  Vanity  Fair  was  begun  a little  while  before  the  late  war,  but 
did  not  last,  — the  times  too  serious  for  jesting. 

All  these  endeavors,  successful  and  unsuccessful,  I chronicle  on  account  of  their  influence  on 
engraving.  Most  certainly,  as  demand  creates  supply,  (so  it  is  said,  though  it  is  the  supply 
that  creates  demand  in  many  cases,)  these  publications,  even  the  most  short-lived,  summoned 
forth  a numerous  array  of  young  or  new  engravers.  The  influence  upon  the  art,  as  distinguished 
from  benefit  to  the  professors,  is  another  matter.  It  ought  to  have  been  educative  and  good. 
It  was  good  to  this  extent:  it  took  men  away  from  the  tendency  to  mere  fineness  of  work, 
which,  following  the  decadent  work  of  England,  seemed  threatening  destruction  to  everything 
like  artistic  excellence.  But  while  doing  this,  the  advantage  to  be  gained  from  a larger  treat- 
ment — testing  an  engraver’s  knowledge  of  drawing  and  his  power  of  line  — was  neutralized 
by  the  necessity  of  unstudious  haste  to  meet  the  requirements  of  rapid  publication.  It  may  be 
indeed  a question  whether  the  amount  of  slop-work,  almost  necessitated  by  a newspaper,  has 
not  done  more  to  deteriorate  the  character  of  engraving  than  even  the  pursuit  of  mere  mechan- 
ical excellence  into  which  the  art  was  falling.  “ Anything  good  enough,”  so  that  it  was  first  in 
the  market,  did  not  help  to  elevate  the  art.  Some  little  attempt  was  made  by  Leslie,  in  1867, 
when  I first  came  to  this  country,  to  improve  the  work  in  his  paper;  but  the  effort  lasted  only 
a few  months.  I suppose  it  did  not  pay.  The  unknowing  public  did  not  demand  improvement. 
Of  Leslie’s  other  numerous  illustrated  publications  there  is  no  need  to  speak:  they  were  and  are 
of  the  same  description  as  the  newspaper.  Nor  of  Harper  s Weekly  Journal  of  Civilization  up 
to  the  same  date,  1867,  and  even  for  some  years  later,  can  I as  an  artist  speak  with  more 
satisfaction.  I find  there  only  a few  good  cuts,  much  very  common  work  (I  speak  simply  of 
the  engraving),  a certain  general  improvement  crawling  through  the  first  dozen  years;  but 
nothing  to  which  I could  refer  an  engraver  for  his  learning  or  to  stir  his  emulation.  The  earlier 
newspapers  (Strong’s,  Barnum’s,  Anthony’s),  following  the  example  of  the  London  Illustrated 
News , were  at  least  not  sparing  of  illustration,  such  as  it  was.  The  cuts  in  the  early  numbers 
of  Harper  are  few  and 'far  between,  of  no  great  importance  either. 

The  first  number  of  the  Journal  of  Civilization , January  3,  1857,  contains  four  two-column 
cuts  about  three  inches  high,  and  two  comic  cuts,  one  a column  and  a half,  the  other  three 
columns  wide.  This  is  all,  except  the  well-known  heading,  in  the  “illustrated”  paper.  No.  2 
affords  a yet  poorer  lot  of  illustration,  — eight  small  cuts,  not  one  of  them  three  inches  square. 
No.  3 ventures  on  a cut  across  the  top  of  the  four  columns,  two  nearly  three-column  cuts,  and 
a column  portrait.  No.  4 really  makes  a show,  — eleven  cuts  in  the  two  centre  pages,  nothing 
elsewhere.  Thenceforth  there  is  a gentle  increase  of  embellishment,  mostly  common  cuts,  such 
as  might  illustrate  cheap  octavo  and  duodecimo  books : landscapes,  portraits,  with  occasional 
comic  cuts,  social  or  political,  of  the  usual  excellence.  By  the  time  we  come  to  No.  16  there 
is  a beginning  of  newspaper  work,  representations  of  events,  a good  portrait  of  the  then 
Governor  of  New  York,  and  three  half-page  cuts  of  Hon.  E.  Everett  in  the  Assembly  at  Albany, 
and  Miss  Rothschild' s Wedding ; besides  two  pages  of  small  cuts  of  news  from  Nicaragua,  — fairly 
engraved  and  well  printed;  and  a batch  of  comics.  A later  number  has  a portrait  of  Palmerston 
and  half  a page  of  English  news,  suggestive  (perhaps  incorrectly)  of  importation  of  casts. 
Before  the  six  months  are  out  we  have  a full  front-page  engraving,  portraits  of  Prince  Frederic 
William  of  Prussia  and  the  Princess  Royal  of  England;  and  soon  after  there  is  a full-page 
royal  Victorian  “ drawing-room,”  and  proper  newspaper  complement  of  portraits,  scenes,  fashions, 
and  caricatures.  A two-page  cut  of  the  Collins  steamship  astonishes  us  in  No.  39.  But  neither 
engraving  nor  printing  improves  at  the  same  rate.  Indeed,  in  this  first  volume  there  is  little  to 
notice  as  engraving,  except  some  good  portraits  from  drawings  by  S.  Wallin.  It  may  be  worth 
remarking  that  Homer  and  Ilcnncssy  seem  to  have  here  made  their  beginnings  as  draughtsmen. 
As  the  years  go  on,  larger  cuts,  with  necessarily  bolder  work,  are  ventured  on.  There  is  daring, 
if  little  art:  evidence  of  a certain  mastery  of  the  graver  gained  through  the  larger  practice, — 


NEWSPAPERS  AND  MAGAZINES 


evidence  also  of  always  haste,  that  enemy  of  perfection.  During  the  War  much  attention  to 
art  was  not  to  be  expected : the  earliest  news  had  to  be  cared  for.  Again  my  criticism  refers 
only  to  the  engraving.  The  sketches  ofWaud,  Pfomer,  and  others,  do  not  come  into  my  province, 
except  so  far  as  I may  remark,  while  recognizing  their  originality  and  vigor,  that  the  drawings 
on  the  wood  could  only  be  hurried,  and  the  engraver  also  had  to  work  against  time.  Excep- 
tions of  course  may  be  found.  A masterly  portrait  of  Martin  Van  Buren,  drawn  I suppose  by 
Wallin,  whose  portraits  are  always  good,  appears  in  No.  293,  Vol.  VI.,  vigorously  and  beautifully 
engraved  and  as  well  printed.  There  is  no  engraver’s  name  to  it.  In  1863  (Nov.  21)  I find 
another  good  piece  of  large  work,  — the  Great  Russian  Ball , drawn  on  the  wood  by  Winslow 
Homer.  By  1871  the  improvement  is  very  noticeable.  Designs  and  engravings  assume  a more 


Engraved  by  Harley. 

From  “The  Riverside  Magazine.” 


— Drawn  by  Darley. 

Published  by  Hurd  & Houghton. 


NEWSPAPERS  AND  MAGAZINES 


3i 


ambitious  character,  both  in  size  and  in  effect.  But  the  engraving  is  not  much  improved. 
Allowing  for  exceptions,  I would  rather  call  it  more  careless  than  ever.  And  by  this  time  so 
great  a proportion  of  foreign  work  occupies  the  paper  that  it  is  impossible,  unless  led  by  names 
of  known  engravers  (seldom  allowed  to  assert  themselves  in  an  engraving  establishment),  to  place 
anything  as  really  native  talent. 

Anderson  and  Adams — it  cannot  be  too  often  repeated  — drew  with  the  graver.  Had  An- 
derson’s Ridinger  and  Teniers  prints  been  taken  as  exemplars,  [but  it  would  seem  that  these  had 
passed  out  of  sight,  disregarded  and  forgotten,]  the  large  work  required  in  the  newspapers  had 
been  a noble  education  for  the  engravers.  Even  in  Anderson’s  rudest  work  every  line  is  the 
line  of  an  artist,  a line  with  meaning:  the  ordinary  newspaper  cutting  had  no  meaning.  Except 
in  the  portraits,  the  one  object  appeared  to  be  to  keep  color.  Form  might  take  care  of  itself. 
Certain  conventional  lines,  a little  rougher  or  a little  smoother,  not  always  that,  served  for  skies, 
walls,  ground;  a flatter  line  passed  for  water,  and  a short  dig  with  the  graver  for  trees.  It 
was  conventionality  of  the  worst  kind,  not  formality  respecting  some  recognized  rules,  but  for- 
mality without  perception,  the  work  of  sheer  ignorance  and  absence  of  mind.  Men  for  so  much 
a week  got  into  the  way  of  “ engraving,”  knowing  and  caring  nothing  for  it  as  an  art.  Even  the 
better  class  of  work  suffered  from  this  habitual  slovenliness  and  want  of  drawing.  Bad  habits 
cannot  be  acquired  with  impunity.  It  was  with  some  hope  of  remedying  this  state  of  things 
that  in  1871  I brought  out  an  eight-page  folio  of  large  engravings,  called  American  Enterprise , 
the  drawings  chiefly  by  Hennessy,  the  engraving  by  W.  J.  and  H.  D.  Linton  and  Alfred  Harral 
(a  pupil  of  Orrin  Smith).  The  largest,  Bacchus  in  America , 25  X 1 6 inches,  drawn  by  Hen- 
nessy and  engraved  entirely  by  me,  I may  notice  as  I believe  the  largest  wood-engraving  ever 
done  as  a studied  work  of  art,  [larger  cuts  not  artistic  there  certainly  are,]  and  also  because  it 
was  an  endeavor  to  recall  attention  to  the  old  white  line  of  Anderson  and  Bewick. 

Almost  simultaneously  with  this,  Every  Saturday  (Fields,  Osgood,  & Co.,  Boston)  came  out 
as  an  illustrated  newspaper,  promising  attention  to  art,  and  looking  to  a successful  competition 
with  Harper  s Weekly  by  means  of  better  paper  and  printing.  Its  early  numbers  were  filled 
with  electrotypes  from  the  London  Graphic , on  the  use  of  which,  indeed,  the  speculation  was 
based.  As  opportunity  offered,  American  work  supplemented  the  foreign;  but  when  the  Franco- 
Prussian  war  began,  news  again  took  the  place  of  art:  quite  right  perhaps  from  a publisher’s 
standing-point,  but  in  this  instance  not  advantageous  even  to  the  publisher.  Every  Saturday 
did  not  live  through  a second  year. 

Our  Young  Folks  (Ticknor  & Fields,  Boston)  an  octavo  monthly  magazine,  begun  in  1865 
and  continuing  to  1873,  may  be  referred  to  as  showing  the  average  ability  of  that  period: 
including  the  names  of  Davis  & Speer,  Morse,  Redding,  Matthews  & Robins,  N.  Orr,  Kingdon  & 
Boyd,  Richardson,  Kilburn,  Cullen,  Anthony,  and  Linton,  as  engravers;  and  Eytinge,  Fay,  Fenn, 
Hoppin,  Homer,  Hennessy,  Champney,  Davenport,  Barry,  Herrick,  Darley,  Forbes,  Sheppard, 
Waud,  White,  Mary  A.  Hallock,  Jessie  Curtis,  and  Lucy  Gibbons,  as  designers. 

Hurd  & Houghton  also,  in  1867,  ’68,  ’69,  ’70,  issued  a monthly,  the  Riverside  Magazine ; 
the  cuts  in  the  letter-press  generally  inferior  to  those  in  Our  Young  Folks,  but  with  more 
ambitious  effort  in  the  larger  unbacked  page  designs.  Chief  of  these  arc  some  designs  by  John 
La  Farge,  engraved  by  Henry  Marsh.  The  engraving  I reserve  for  future  consideration.  There 
is  also  a scries  of  subjects  by  IT  L.  Stephens,  illustrating  Nursery  Rhymes,  to  be  noticed  both 
for  the  fancy  of  the  designer  and  for  Harley’s  excellent  engraving, — : only  too  much  refined,  and 
so  losing  force  and  effect.  Harley’s  best  work  in  figures  is,  however,  to  be  seen  here;  his  best 
of  all,  more  vigorous  than  the  rest,  but  equally  careful,  is  one  cut  of  Jack  of  the  Mill,  from  a 
drawing  by  Darley,  in  Vol.  IV.  p.  332.  An  excellent  cut  of  Robinson  Crusoe,  by  Marsh,  from 
an  unusually  careful  drawing  by  Nast,  is  borrowed  from  Vol.  II.  p.  145.  (See  next  page.) 

Scribners  Magazine,  begun  in  November,  1871,  demands  with  Harper's  after  same  date  more 
distinct  attention. 


THE  ALDINE 


32 


Drawn  by  Nast.  — Engraved  by  H.  Marsh. 

From  “The  Riverside  Magazine.”  Published  by  Hurd  & Houghton. 


In  1872  another  monthly,  The  Aldine  Press , for  four  years  before  an  illustrated  advertising 
sheet,  developed  into  The  Aldine , the  Art  Journal  of  America;  larger  than  Harper's  Weekly , 
aiming  at  more  careful  engraving  than  the  usual  staple  of  the  newspaper,  with  better  paper  and 
good  printing.  The  early  numbers  may  be  spoken  of  as  tentative.  The  printing  was  good, 
though  on  the  wrong  French  principle,  of  polished  paper  and  brilliant  ink,  contrasts  of  color 
preferred  to  tone ; the  engravings  also  were  creditable,  notwithstanding  the  difficulty  of  suddenly 
escaping  from  a newspaper  style.  And  the  importation  of  French  and  German  engravings  was 
certainly  useful  for  educational  comparison.  I may  mention  my  own  work  here:  Pines  of  the 
Paquette  (1872),  and  White  Birches  of  the  Saranak  (1873),  from  drawings  by  John  Hows; 


CINDERELLA. 

ENGRAVED  BY  JONNARD. 


FROM 


THR  A I.  D INF. 


ENGRAVING  SCHOOL  FOR  WOMEN 


33 


Blood  Money  (1872),  after  Victor  Nehlig;  and  River  Creek , after  T.  Moran,  and  On  Long  Island 
Sound , after  M.  F.  H.  de  Haas  (both  in  1873).  I think  I have  done  no  better  work  than  these. 
There  are  good  cuts  also  by  Bogert,  Davis  & Spier,  and  Ouartley.  Early  work  of  Cole  and 
Juengling  will  also  be  found  in  the  Aldine.  The  drawings  show  the  names  of  Thomas  and 
Peter  Moran,  Woodward,  J.  S.  Davis,  Whittredge,  Casilear,  De  Haas,  Hows,  Hubbard,  Nehlig, 
Laurie,  McEntee,  Homer  D.  Martin,  Van  Elten : a sufficient  variety,  not  counting  English, 
French,  and  German.  The  most  numerous  engravings  are  by  French  hands,  Maurand  and 
Jonnard:  Maurand  for  some  years  working  in  this  country.  Maurand’s  landscapes  are  capital, 
daring,  and  with  more  drawing  as  well  as  decision  than  is  usual  in  American  or  English  engrav- 
ing; failing  nowhere  from  the  engraver’s  lack  of  confidence  in  himself,  but  wanting  grace  and 
tenderness  and  respect  for  the  individuality  of  the  drawing.  They  are  all  clever,  but  they  are 
all  Maurand.  And  the  best  of  them  is  not  so  good  as  the  Valley  of  the  Babbling  Waters  by 
Bogert,  a full-page  cut  in  Vol.  VII.,  1874-5.  In  figures  Maurand  is  excelled  by  Jonnard.  His 
engraving  also  is  generally  too  hard,  of  the  metallic  school  of  Pannemaker;  but,  when  he  steps 
beyond  that,  worthy  of  study  by  whoever  is  desirous  of  seeing  how  the  boldest  lines  may  yet' 
be  harmonious  and  refined.  His  engraving  of  Inspiration  (No.  1,  Vol.  VIII.,  1877)  is  a master- 
piece of  vigorous  yet  perfectly  finished  work.  His  Cinderella  (here  given)  is  very  expressive 
of  his  best  style.  Other  work  in  the  Aldine  would  also  claim  notice,  but  the  “ Aldine  Co.  Sc.” 
or  the  “ Aidine  Co.  Xylo.”  cut  across  the  engravers’  names  warns  us  off  from  further  comment. 
For  the  rest,  by  the  work  it  has  given  to  both  foreign  and  native  artists,  by  its  importation  of 
good  engravings,  and  by  its  good  printing,  the  Aldine  has  undoubtedly  helped  to  a considerable 
extent  the  progress  of  engraving  in  America. 

Some  few  words  as  we  pass  on  our  way  may  not  be  out  of  place  in  mention  of  the  Engrav- 
ing School  for  Women,  generously  established,  in  1859,  by  the  benevolence  of  Mr.  Peter  Cooper, 
at  the  Cooper  Institute,  in  New  York.  The  school,  indeed,  had  its  first  beginning  from  the 
energy  of  a few  ladies,  and  was  for  some  time  supported  by  voluntary  subscriptions  collected 
among  their  friends.  These  means,  however,  being  insufficient,  Mr.  Cooper  was  persuaded  to 
make  it  a part  of  the  gratuitous  system  of  instruction  at  the  Institute.  Before  its  incorporation 
with  that,  Mr.  Herrick  had  been  engaged  as  instructor.  Mr.  O’Brien  succeeded  him  at  the 
Institute ; and  afterwards  I for  a time  endeavored  to  supply  his  place.  The  school  has  since 
been  under  the  superintendence  of  Miss  Cogswell,  and  deserves  every  possible  aid  and  encour- 
agement from  those  who  care  to  help  a fair  opportunity  for  appropriate  and  profitable  occupa- 
tion for  women.  No  great  artist  with  the  graver  may  have  yet  proceeded  thence;  but  Miss 
Powell’s  conscientious  work  has  earned  a place  in  Scribner’s  Portfolio,  and  many  .women  have 
found  employment  after  there  qualifying.  It  was  at  the  Cooper  Institute,  too,  in  the  School  of 
Design,  under  the  able  tuition  of  the  late  Dr.  Rimmer,  that  Mrs.  Foote  (then  Miss  Hallock), 
the  best  of  our  designers  on  the  wood,  began  her  art  studies.  In  the  same  school  Miss  Curtis, 
Miss  Gibbons,  and  Miss  Ledyard  had  their  first  lessons. 


C HAPT  ER  V 


TURNING  from  the  newspaper  history  to  resume  our  consider- 
ation of  book-work,  I go  back  again  to  the  period  of  Putnam’s 
Irving  books.  The  continual  reproduction  and  imitation  of 
current  English  works,  to  say  nothing  of  the  influence  of  Eng- 
lish engravers  (not  a few  here  since  Mason),  could  not  but  affect 
the  character  of  American  art.  Anderson,  as  we  have  seen, 
adhered  to  the  method  of  Bewick.  Adams,  had  he  continued 
in  practice,  had  been  the  Thompson  of  America.  But  their 
examples  were  not  long  followed.  When  the  emasculated  style 
of  engraving  became  popular  in  England,  its  popularity  was 
repeated  here.  I can  find  no  fitter  word  to  characterize  a style 
whose  users,  forgetting  that  the  graver  is  a tool  with  which  to 
draw , lose  all  their  vigor  as  artists,  content  with  effects  to  be  obtained  by  smooth  and  delicate 
tones  and  multiplication  of  weak  because  meaningless  lines.  Not  that  delicacy  is  incompatible 
with  force,  — as  may  be  seen  in  Thompson’s  work  (no  delicacy  of  line  has  exceeded  his);  but 
that  it  is  not  the  first  thing  to  be  sought  by  an  artist.  Even  so  early  as  1850,  notwithstanding 
all  I have  not  too  praisefully  said  of  the  work  of  Childs  and  Whitney,  and  their  fellows  of  the 
Tract  Society,  the  tendency  was  toward  imitation  of  steel.  A generation  had  arisen  in  England, 
unmindful  of  the  artist  engravers,  and  whose  new  aim  was  only  refinement,  the  perfection  of 
mechanism.  “As  fine  as  steel”  was  taken  as  a compliment.  The  prettiness  of  such  English 
work  became  the  fashion  elsewhere.  Fine  they  called  it:  but  it  was  only  minute,  mean  and 
feeble,  and  pretty. 

To  so  sweeping  a condemnation  of  fineness  let  me  at  once  acknowledge  the  possibility  of 
exceptions,  taking  special  note  of  one,  a book  sui  generis , printed  for  private  circulation  in  1862 
by  the  State  of  Massachusetts,  — Harris’s  Insects  injurious  to  Vegetation.  Here  the  fineness  is 
not  a weak  endeavor  to  hide  bad  work,  nor  from  ignorance  of  what  was  meant.  The  insects 
(of  which  I can  give  but  a few,  enough  though  to  show  the  character  of  all),  drawn  from 
nature  by  Sonrel  and  Burckhardt,  needed  most  absolutely  exact  rendering,  to  the  representation 
not  only  of  form  and  color,  but  of  difficult  textures  also;  and  the  engraver,  Henry  Marsh,  was 
therefore  fully  justified  in  his  microscopic  treatment.  No  such  book  had  been  done  before,  nor 
will  it  ever  be  surpassed  [though  some  similar  cuts,  — moths,  etc.,  — engraved  by  Mallory,  in 
1869,  for  the  St.  Louis  Entomological  Journal,  are  nearly  if  not  quite  as  good].  It  is  work  not 
only  of  patience  and  remarkable  eyesight,  but  also  of  true  artistic  skill;  showing,  too,  in  the 
comparison  of  the  steel  plates  with  the  wood-cuts,  that  there  are  powers  of  expression  in  wood 
which  cannot  be  equalled  by  the  rival  process.  The  book  is  unique;  and,  printed  in  a manner 
worthy  of  the  illustrations  by  the  late  A.  K.  P.  Welch,  of  the  University  Press,  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  proves  what  can  be  accomplished  when  care  and  time  faithfully  subserve  artistic  talent. 


INSECTS  INJURIOUS  TO  VEGETATION 


35 


Surely,  when  I exclaim  against  fine  work,  it  is  not  such  fine  work  as  this.  But  everything  has 
its  place.  My  censure  is  aimed  at  the  fineness  that  superseded  healthier  art  (in  England  first, 


Engraved  by  Henry  Marsh. 

From  Harris’s  “ Insects  injurious  to  Vegetation.” 

as  before  said)  in  that  era  of  commonness  out  of  which 
arose  the  gift-books,  “ editions  de  luxe”  books  illustrated, 
not  because  the  text  required  it,  but  merely  for  the  sake 
of  pseudo-adornment  and  embellishing:  a trade  endeavor 
to  produce  something  more  attractive  than  ordinary.  No 
fault  this  of  the  publisher,  whose  business  is  not  so  much 
to  educate  or  encourage  the  producer  as  to  sell  the  pro- 
duce. Nor  do  I blame  the  artist  so  employed  for  meet- 
ing the  market  requisitions.  It  is  not  stipulated  by  his 
employers  that  he  shall  neglect  the  higher  things  in  art 
while  caring  for  the  saleable  refinement.  Fine  and  small 
work,  beyond  the  insect  world,  may  be  good,  and  need 
not  be  weak.  I do  but  take  note  of  a too  prevailing 
tendency,  and  even  noting  it  have  praise  to  give. 

Earliest  of  these  art-luxuries  in  this  country  were  the 
Irving  books,  already  credited  with  talent.  Then  there 
was  Dr.  Holland’s  Bitter-Sweet,  brought  out  by  the  elder 
Scribner:  designs  by  E.  J.  Whitney,  engravings  not  above 
the  level.  A more  important  work  was  Palmer’s  Folk 


36 


GIFT  BOOKS 


Engraved  by  Anthony. 


Songs  (Scribner,  1866-7),  important  in  the  opportunity  afforded,  by  a long  array  of  designers, 
for  the  engravers  to  display  themselves.  The  list  of  engravers  upon  it  is  a long  one  also;  but 
there  is  little  variety  of  treatment.  Despite  the  publisher’s  liberality,  the  book  rather  marks  the 
ebb  of  engraving  talent,  at  best  an  average  of  creditable  mediocrity.  This  may  be  in  part 
owing  to  the  unpractised  draughtsmen.  Not  a few  were  young  hands  upon  the  wood.  The 
same  apology  may  be  made  for  Enoch  Arden  (Ticknor  & Fields,  1865-6).  The  drawings  there 
are  by  Darley,  Vedder,  La  Farge,  and  Hennessy;  and  queer  enough,  except  those  by  the 
accustomed  hand  of  Darley,  they  must  have  been.  The  engravers  — Marsh,  J.  A.  Bogert, 
Anthony,  Davis,  Berlett,  Kilburn  & Mallory,  Morse,  and  Annin  — may  be  forgiven  for  any 
failure.  Nevertheless,  the  book  is  worth  notice  for  some  originality  of  treatment,  at  least  an 

endeavor  to  escape  from  the  bondage  of 
routine,  by  closer  attention  to  the  peculi- 
arities of  the  draughtsmen.  Other  gift- 
books  followed  in  swift  and  regular  suc- 
cession. Those  of  Messrs.  Ticknor  & 
Fields,  Fields,  Osgood,  & Co.,  and  James 
R.  Osgood  & Co.,  daintily  produced  under 
the  tasteful  supervision  of  Mr.  Anthony, 
were  not  without  useful  influence  on  the 
art,  — better  drawings  helping  toward  bet- 
ter engravings.  Appleton  & Co.,  as  well 
as  the  houses  just  named,  had  their  share 
in  fostering  a higher  class  of  design  ; aid- 
ing it  also,  so  far  as  glazed  paper  would 
allow,  by  good  printing.  I need  but  pass- 
ingly notice  these  books,  all  probably  well 
known  to  my  readers.  From  the  Boston 
firm  issued,  in  1866-7,  Lowell’s  Vision  of 
Sir  Launfal , with  ten  small  designs  by 
Eytinge,  engraved  by  Anthony ; in  1868-9, 
Tennyson’s  Locksley  Hall,  with  nineteen 
cuts  by  Anthony,  after  Hennessy;  and  in 
1869-70,  Whittier’s  Snow-Bound,  I think 
the  daintiest  gift-book  of  them  all,  — some 
forty  small  drawings  by  H.  Fenn,  his  early 
careful  work,  a few  engraved  by  me,  but 
most  by  Anthony  and  of  his  best,  — sub- 
jects and  drawing  well  suited  to  his  graver, 
— honest  while  refined.  I would  especially 
point  out  those  on  pages  11,  17,  123,  the 
lower  one  on  page  28,  and  others  on  pages 
51,  57,  and  69.  Dickens’s  Christmas  Carol 
(Anthony  again)  appeared  in  the  same 
year;  followed  in  1870-1  by  Winter  Poems, 
illustrated  by  Fenn,  Homer,  Griswold, 
Hennessy,  Eytinge,  Martin,  McEntee,  and 
Fredericks.  Then  came  a large  quarto, 
Hennessy’s  drawings  of  Edwin  Booth  in 
his  principal  characters,  some  of  the  cuts 
in  which  had  previously  appeared  in  Every 


Engraved  by  Anthony. 

From  “Snow-Bound.”  Published  bv  Fields,  Osgood,  & Co. 


Engraved  by  Anthony. 

From  “Mabel  Martin.”  Published  by  James  R.  Osgood  & Co. 


From  “Snow-Bound.”  Published  by  Fields,  Osgood,  & Co. 


GIFT  BOOKS 


37 


Saturday , hardly  therefore  to  be  classed 
in  the  series  I am  chronicling;  and  in 
1875-6  and  following  years  Whittier’s 
Mabel  Martin,  Longfellow’s  Skeleton  in 
Armor  and  Hanging  of  the  Crane,  and 
Hawthorne’s  Scarlet  Letter:  the  figure 

subjects  in  these  four  by  Mary  A.  Hal- 
lock  (now  Mrs.  Foote),  the  landscapes  by 
Waud  and  T.  Moran,  the  initials  and  or- 
namental work  by  Harley  and  Ipsen;  the 
engraving  chiefly  by  Anthony.  In  the 
early  part  of  the  same  gift  period,  before 
the  beginning  of  their  Magazine,  Scribner 
& Co.  brought  out  Dr.  Holland’s  Kathrina 
(1868-9)  and  Mrs.  Browning’s  Lady  Ger- 
aldine (1869-70),  both  numerously  illus- 
trated by  Hennessy,  the  Kathrina  having 
also  some  landscapes  by  Griswold.  In 
both  books  the  engraving  goes  under  my 
name.  In  the  Lady  Geraldine  I had  the 
help,  for  almost  all  the  landscape  part,  of 
Alfred  Harral,  my  fellow-worker  in  early 
years.  The  Kathrina  was  entirely  my 
own.  In  it  I may  point  out  some  differ- 
ence of  style,  the  white-line  method  being 
followed  throughout.  In  1868  the  Ameri- 
can Tract  Society  produced  the  Women 
of  the  Bible,  already  referred  to,  with  Engraved  by  Anthony. 

drawings  by  F.  A.  Chapman,  some  of  From  “The  Scarlet  Letter.  Published  by  James  R.  Osgood  & Co. 

them  of  excellent  feeling  and  finish  engraved  by'  Hayes.  Nor  were  Messrs.  Appleton  & Co.  idle. 
J find  between  the  above-given  dates,  published  by  them,  Bryant’s  Song  of  the  Soiuer  (1870-1), 
with  forty-two  engravings;  Bryant’s  Story  of  the  Fountain  (1871-2),  forty-two  engravings; 
Bryant’s  Little  People  in  the  Snow  (1872-3),  with  designs  by  Fredericks;  and  by  Fredericks 
also,  A Midsummer  Night's  Dream ; — the  last  two  engraved  by  Bobbett,  with  tint  behind  the 
black-line  work,  — very  effective.  The  Dream  is  altogether  an  imposing  book. 

These  gift-books,  produced  with  much  care  and  at  great  cost,  however  differing  in  merit, 
and  whatever  of  demerit  the  critic  may  impute  to  them,  certainly  afforded  practice  and  encour- 
agement to  both  designers  and  engravers.  If  full  advantage  were  not  taken  by  commensurate 
improvement,  whether  in  drawing  or  in  engraving,  the  fault  lay  not  with  the  publishers.  For  a 
further  great  incentive  to  good  work  we  are  indebted  to  the  enterprise  of  Messrs.  Appleton  in 
the  issue  of  the  most  important  book  of  landscape  that  has  appeared  in  this  country,  their 
Picturesque  America,  now  complete  in  two  handsome  volumes,  but  first  published  in  monthly 
parts,  in  1872,  ’73,  ’74.  The  imperial  quarto  size  of  the  page  gave  scope  to  the  engraver;  and 
there  was  no  more  need  either  for  the  weakening  refinement  of  small  book-work  or  for  the 
haste  of  newspaper  requiring.  The  best  landscapes  engraved  in  this  country  (and  nothing  of 
later  years  in  England  will  equal  them)  are  to  be  found  here.  I have  gone  carefully  through 
the  two  volumes,  picking  out  without  reference  to  names  what  seemed  to  me  the  best,  — the 
most  artistic,  the  most  effective,  the  best  also  in  manipulation,  — and  it  may  be  well,  if  only  for 
the  sake  of  any  of  my  readers  desirous  of  perceiving  differences  of  treatment,  to  make  some 
attempt  at  classifying  these.  I take  the  first  volume. 


38 


PICTURESQUE  AMERICA 


I think  nothing  more  satisfactory 
is  to  be  found  in  this  than  the  work 
of  F.  O.  Quartley,  an  Englishman, 
but  I suppose  sufficiently  acclimated 
to  be  noticed  in  the  history  of 
American  engraving.  Always  firm 
and  honest  (terms  to  be  repeated 
because  expressing  the  first  qualifi- 
cations of  an  engraver),  his  cuts  are 
sure  to  print  well.  They  are  also 
to  be  commended  for  artistic  atten- 
tion to  differences  and  for  careful 
gradating  of  color.  I would  rank 
him  first  among  the  Picturesque 
Americans.  The  cuts  I signalize  as 
his  best  (there  are  none  bad,  though 
of  course  there  is  a perceptible  dif- 
ference of  merit,  of  carefulness,  of 
success  in  rendering  his  subject)  are 
Castle  Head,  Mount  Desert  (page  i), 
the  Tennessee  (page  52),  Chattanooga 
(page  57),  the  French  Broad  (page 
133),  the  Entrance  to  Weyer  s Cave 
(page  212),  the  Yellozv stone  (page 
292),  and  Niagara  and  Under  the  Falls  (pages  432,  437)  : all  admirable  for  both  mechanism 
and  feeling.  These  are  all  from  drawings  by  Harry  Fenn.  Harley,  I think,  stands  next  to 
Ouartley  for  general  excellence : his  engraving  not  so  strong  as  Quartley’s,  but  with  more 

variety  as  well  as  feeling,  and  always,  from  the  cleanness  of  his  line,  easy  for  the  printer.  Of 
his  I select  the  Lovers'  Leap  (page  139),  Cliffs  above  Dismal  Pool  (page  170),  the  Date  Palm 
(page  189  — rich  in  line),  Entrance  to  Watkins  Glen  and  Fairy  Arch  (pages  240,  285 — of  the 
same  richness),  Soda  Springs  (page  313),  Lima  Lsland  in  Winter  (page  448),  and  Ice  Forms 

(page  449)  : all  very  good,  the  last  especially  as  an  accurate  representation  of  nature.  These 

Harleys,  also,  are  all  by  Fenn.  Morse,  whose  general  work  most  resembles  Quartley’s,  — not  so 
decided,  but  with  more  sense  of  tone,  — has  a good  cut,  Interior  of  Natural  Tunnel  (page  337)> 
drawn  by  Sheppard,  and  one  more  characteristic  of  himself,  Main  Street,  Buffalo,  by  Woodward 
(page  513).  Filmer’s  best,  I would  say,  are  Cliffs  on  the  Yellowstone,  and  the  First  Boat  on  the 
Yosemite  (pages  301,  308),  by  Fenn,  Sentinel  Rock  (page  475),  by  J.  D.  Smillie,  and  At  the 
Mouth  of  Russian  River  (page  554),  by  R.  Swain  Gifford.  There  is  good  engraving,  also,  not 

too  wearisomely  to  particularize,  by  Bogert,  (page  84)  the  Natural  Bridge,  Virginia;  by  Lang- 

riclge,  (pages  54,  113)  Lookout  Mountain  and  Mauch  Chunk,  (page  454)  Trenton  Falls,  and 
(page  379)  Hills  near  Moorfield — exceptionally  good;  by  Karst,  (page  257)  Grist-Mills  at 
East  Hampton,  and  (pages  347,  350,  351)  the  Peaks  of  Otter,  Natural  Towers,  and  Jump 
Mountain ; by  N.  Orr,  (pages  177,  225,  3 77)  Boat-Landing,  Powder  Mills,  and  Arched  Strata; 
by  Richardson,  (pages  224,  433)  Rising  Sun  and  the  Brink  of  the  Horseshoe ; by  Halliwell, 
(page  277)  a Planters  Home ; by  Bobbett,  (page  429)  Willamette  Falls ; by  Anthony  (pages 
44T  457)  the  Whirlpool,  and  High  Falls,  Trenton. 

I need  not  spend  so  many  words  upon  the  second  volume,  though  in  no  respect  inferior  to 
the  first.  Enough  to  mention  a few  of  the  cuts  that  first  strike  me:  Sinking  Run  above  Tyrone, 
and  Monument  Rock  (pages  144,  181),  by  Quartley;  Dial  Rocks,  Laramie  Plains  (page  1 7 1 ) , 
by  Filmer;  Truckee  River  (page  193),  by  Morse;  Pine  Forest  on  the  Susquehanna  (page  213), 


Engraved  by  W.  J.  Linton. 


From  “ Kathrina,”  Published  by  Scribner  & Co. 


WALLS  OF  THE  GRAND  CANON.  AFTER  THOS.  MORAN. 


ENGRAVED  BY  ANNIN. 


J-kOM  PICTURBSQI 


AMERICA. 


PUBLISHED 


BY  D.  APPLETON  & CO. 


PICTURESQUE  AMERICA 


39 


by  Langridge;  Old  Mill,  and  Silver  Cascade  (pages  296,  297),  by  Harley;  Ascent  of  Whiteface 
(page  414),  by  Slader,  an  Englishman,  one  of  the  most  effective  and  at  the  same  time  the  most 
delicate  in  the  two  volumes;  and  Walls  of  the  Grand  CaTion  (page  5°9)>  by  Annin,  which  I 
would  call  the  most  careful  and  the  best  of  the  whole  series. 


Ascent  of  Whiteface.  — Engraved  by  Slader. 

From  “ Picturesque  America.”  Published  by  D.  Appleton  & Co. 

The  English  engravers  (beside  Quartley  and  Slader)  represented  arc  Henry  Linton,  Measom, 
Cranston,  Palmer,  Alfred  Harral,  and  myself.  The  work  of  the  two  first  named  is  rather  below 
than  above  the  general  average:  the  best  I find,  Goshen  Pass  (Vol.  1.  p.  352)>  by  H.  Linton, 
and  Washington  Rock  (Vol.  II.  p.  49),  by  Measom.  Cranston  has  a good  cut  (Vol.  II.  p.  127), 
Looking  South  from  South  Mountain;  Palmer  a few  in  Vol.  II.,  the  best  of  which  are  Moss 
Glen  Cascade  (page  287)  and  the  Ausablc  Chasm  (page  415)— .an  excellent  engraving,  but 
■ wanting  transparency  in  the  water.  Alfred  Harral  has  many  in  both  volumes.  1 would  call 
attention  to  Calking  on  the  Neversink  (page  178),  Gorge  of  the  Yellowstone  (page  296),  and 
Mill  on  the  Antietam  Road  (page' 335),  all  in  Vol.  I.,  as  specimens  of  Ins  ability.  It  will  not 


40 


PICTURESQUE  EUROPE 


hurt  the  engraver  to  compare  these  English  cuts  with  the  American,  to  note  what  differences  of 
style  may  obtain.  All  such  rivalry  and  friendly  comparison  helps  to  understanding.  For  this 
reason  I may  be  suffered  to  speak  also  of  my  own  endeavors.  Surely  not  with  bragging  intent, 
but  because  I have  sought  to  express  the  drawings  under  my  hand  in  a fashion  somewhat 
different  from  that  of  my  fellow-engravers.  In  landscape  subjects  the  drawings  are  usually 
worked  in  with  Indian  ink  or  sepia,  and  the  engraver  has  to  find  the  lines  most  appropriate  to 
the  same.  There  are  exceptions  to  this  manner  of  drawing,  — as,  for  instance,  the  Pine  Forest  by 
Langridge  (Vol.  II.  p.  213),  a great  part  of  which  might  have  been  drawn  in  pencil  lines  and 
engraved  fac-simile;  and  the  same  peculiarity  occurs  in  the  light  edges  of  vignettes,  and  in  the 
lighter  portions  of  other  cuts,  — light  trees  and  grasses  especially.  Still,  the  mass  of  landscape 

drawing  is  tint;  and,  as  said  before,  the  engraver  has  to  express  that  in  lines.  The  fault  of 

which  I accuse  almost  all  work  of  later  days  is  that  the  engraver  seems  to  care  only  for  color, 
for  the  general  effect  of  his  cut,  neglecting  the  making  out  of  forms  and  the  expression  of 
different  substances,  letting  two  or  three  sets  of  unmeaning  lines  serve  for  everything.  I hold 
that,  on  the  contrary,  the  engraver  should  be  always  aware  of  the  many  differences  of  form  and 
substance,  texture,  nearness,  distance,  etc.,  and  use  his  graver  as  he  would  a pencil  in  distinctly 
and  accurately  rendering  them.  This  is  what  I at  least  try  to  do,  and  for  this  I claim  some 
distinction  for  my  work.  Beyond  the  recognition  of  this  endeavor  I do  not  ask  for  notice  or 
especial  praise.  And  while  I may  point  out  those  of  my  cuts  which  I think  are  the  best 

exponents  of  my  theory  and  practice,  I am  free  to  confess  that  my  work  in  other  respects  may 

fall  short  of  others’.  To  give  but  one  instance:  I have  done  nothing  of  the  same  clearness, 
which  means  fitness  for  printing,  nothing  with  so  pure  a line  (taken  only  as  line),  as  what  will 
be  found  most  noticeably  in  Ouartley’s  engravings.  In  comparison  with  his  my  cuts  in  this 
Picturesque  America  have  been  generally  coarse  and  harsh;  yet  I no  less  insist  on  the  theory 
advanced  above.  Enough  said,  perhaps,  to  explain  my  position.  I may  now  name  what  I con- 
sider the  best  of  my  work  as  examples,  notwithstanding  any  failure  on  my  part,  of  what  should 
be  aimed  at  by  the  engraver.  The  engraver  may  like  to  know  also  what  an  old  hand  would 
pick  out  as  his  best,  not  for  finish  so  much  as  for  sound  work  and  expression. 

In  Vol.  I.,  Spouting  Horn  (page  9),  coarse,  but  every  line  drawn;  Tower  Falls  (page  305), 
of  the  same  character;  Berkeleys  Scat  (page  373).  In  Vol.  II.,  Catskill  Falls  (page  121); 
Glimpse  of  Lake  Champlain  (page  281);  Looking  toivard  Smugglers  Notch  (page  286);  Pulpit 
Rock , Nahant  (page  395);  and  Marble  Cahon  (page  50 7).  These  are  sufficient  to  indicate  my 
ground  of  comparison;  and,  if  the  inquiry  have  interest,  it  can  be  pursued  further. 

Of  Picturesque  Europe , immediately  following  Picturesque  America,  I need,  on  account  of  its 
similarity,  say  but  little.  The  illustrations,  most  of  them  engraved  in  England,  are  not  on  the 
whole  so  good  as  the  American  work.  Those  by  Harley  and  Morse  (there  is  one  by  Morse, 
a Windmill  at  Rye,  Vol.  I.  p.  85,  more  vigorous  than  usual  with  him)  are  certainly  much 
superior,  both  in  feeling  and  in  manipulation,  to  the  multitude  which  passes  with  the  name  of 
Whymper,  many  of  which  are  coarse  in  the  worst  sense  of  the  word.  It  may  be  worth  while 
for  the  student  of  engraving  to  refer  to  one  at  page  120,  Vol.  I.,  Burnham  Beeches,  if  only  to 
see  the  extreme  of  vulgarity  — pretentious  commonness,  with  utter  disregard  of  what  an  artist 
understands  as  quality  or  value:  coarse  (Pannemaker  out-Pannemakered),  bold  as  ignorance, 
and  most  absurdly  and  unfortunately  emphasized  by  contrast  with  a steel  plate  (also  of  the 
Beeches ) immediately  following.  I name  this  as  a specimen  of  mistaken  daring,  not  as  a sample 
of  work  called  after  Whymper,  whose  name  is  Region.  There  are  many  good  cuts  with  his 
ascription.  Also  others  that  I would  like  to  notice,  but  wanting  names  I cannot  speak  of  them 
as  American  or  English.  All  exceptions  allowed,  the  engraving  in  the  Europe  is  not  equal  to 
that  of  the  earlier  work.  In  both  books,  however,  I venture  to  assert  that  the  average  engrav- 
ings on  wood  have  more  artistic  merit  than  the  finer  and  yet  more  mechanical  steel  plates. 


ENGRAVED  BY  W.  J.  LINTON.  DRAWN  BY  GRANVILLE  PERKINS. 


CHAPTER  VI 


STAYED  consideration  of  Harper  s Magazine  in  order  to  re- 
sume my  notice  of  it  at  the  date  at  which  I have  now  to  take 
up  its  competitor.  Scribner  s Magazine  was  started  in  Novem- 
ber, 1871,  and  for  four  or  five  years  the  two  magazines 
( Scribner's  and  Harpers ) preserved  a pretty  fair  level,  — with 
little  of  importance  in  either  in  the  matter  of  engraving,  only 
some  improvement  in  paper  and  printing.  In  Scribner , during 
that  period,  I remark  nothing  very  extraordinary  save  a general 
tendency  toward  fineness;  a few  good  portraits;  and  a series 
of  capital  cuts  (1875),  from  Moran’s  drawings,  which  appear  to 
have  been  afterwards  used  (ill-used,  so  far  as  printing  went)  in 
the  Governmental  Report  of  Professor  Powell’s  Exploration  of 
the  Colorado  River.  The  subjects  of  these  cuts  (engraved  by  Bookhout,  Bogert,  King,  Smith- 
wick,  Nichol,  Muller,  and  others)  demanded  a certain  degree  of  minuteness;  and  Moran’s 
distinct  drawing  helped  toward  clearness  and  effectiveness  in  the  engraving.  These  seem  to 
have  been  the  precursors  of  that  race  of  microscopic  littleness  which  has  latterly  marked  the 
career  of  the  two  leading  magazines,  to  which  I shall  have  to  call  more  particular  attention 
further  on. 

St.  Nicholas , Scribner’s  illustrated  magazine  for  boys  and  girls,  was  begun  in  1873,  with 
work  of  the  same  character  as  that  in  Young  Folks  (whose  place  it  presently  took),  but  steadily 
improving.  The  designs  and  engravings,  though  generally  lighter  and  less  important  than  those 
in  Scribner  s Monthly , are  by  the  same  hands.  One  criticism  may  serve  for  both.  Some  cuts 
I shall  have  to  notice  elsewhere.  Here  I may  give  special  commendation  to  the  Heart  of 
Winter , drawn  by  Moran,  one  of  King’s  best  engravings  (Vol.  IV.  p.  65),  and  to  Bogcrt’s 
Caught  by  the  Snow , Moran  also  (Vol.  IV.  p.  793),  a cut  full  of  refinement  and  delicacy  with- 
out sacrifice  of  effect.  I name  these  as  samples  of  much  excellent  work. 

Excellent  work,  too,  has  been  done  in  Harper  s Monthly  since  the  competition  with  Scribner. 
I would  direct  attention  to  the  admirable  copies  of  subjects  from  Turner,  by  Annin  (the  Datur 
Ilora  Quieti  is  his),  Hoskin,  Measom,  Johnson,  and  Bernstrom,  in  Vol.  EVI.,  the  number  for 
I'ebruary,  1878.  And  I may  note  some  good  copies  of  illustrations  by  the  London  Etching 
Club,  to  Milton’s  Id  Allegro,  in  the  same  volume  (No.  335,  for  April).  I must  also  single  out 
for  praise  the  portraits  of  eminent  musicians  in  No.  343,  Vol.  EVIII.  The  whole  series  is  good; 
but  I would  speak  of  three  or  four  as  best,  — the  Mozart  and  Schumann,  engraved  by  Johnson; 
the  Handel  and  Beethoven,  by  Kruell.  All  are  first-rate,  honest,  well  drawn,  effective,  and 
delicate.  I know  no  better  heads  anywhere;  and  I would  point  to  these  as  examples  of  how  a 
head  may  be  best  engraved  on  wood.  There  is  a little  difference  in  the  work  of  the  two 
engravers,  Mr.  Kruell’s  line  being  richer,  showing  also  more  knowledge  of  form.  1 shall  have 


APPLETON’S  ART  JOURNAL 


later  to  speak  of  Mr.  Kruell. 
The  Mozart  may  be  given  here 
as  a fine  specimen  of  the  series ; 
and  I would  have  my  readers 
remark,  not  only  the  qualities  I 
have  already  noticed,  but  also 
how  the  cross-lining  [I  advocate 
cross-lining  wherever  it  is  useful] 
represents  the  powdered  hair,  at 
the  same  time  keeping  it  well 
distinguished  from  the  flesh. 

In  1875,  Messrs.  Appleton  be- 
gan their  Art  Journal : to  some 
extent  a reproduction  of  the 
magazine  under  the  same  name 
published  in  England,  but  with 
addition  of  matter  of  more  spe- 
cial American  interest,  and  of  en- 
gravings executed  in  this  country. 
The  average  work  so  done  for 
the  Journal  compares  very  fa- 
vorably with  that  imported,  so 
far  as  I am  able  to  distinguish, 
wanting  names  sometimes  for 
my  guidance.  Of  the  landscapes, 
Morse’s  and  Karst’s,  from  Wood- 
ward’s excellent  drawings,  may 
stand  among  the  best.  There 
are  good  cuts,  too,  by  Harley 
and  Filmer;  two  by  Filmer,  after 
Caught  by  the  Snow.  — Engraved  by  Bogert.  Peter  Moran,  in  No.  41,  very 

From  Scribner’s  “ St  Nicholas.”  good  indeed.  It  may  also  be 

worth  while  to  notice,  in  No.  51,  for  the  sake  of  comparing  the  different  styles,  as  they  stand 
facing  each  other,  Morse’s  Old  Mill,  after  Cropsey,  and  the  New  Moon , by  Anthony,  drawn  by 

Appleton  Brown.  Differing  as  they  do  in  manner,  they  are  both  capital  in  feeling.  The  critical 

inquirer  may  also  examine  two  cuts  in  No.  57:  Up  the  Hillside , by  Juengling,  after  J.  D. 

Smillie,  and  the  Goat  Pasture , by  Smithwick  & French,  after  George  H.  Smillie ; the  last,  in 
its  freedom  from  unmeaning  lines,  very  much  the  better  of  the  two.  In  No.  54  Harley  has 
spoiled  a delicate,  and  in  other  respects  good  engraving,  by  his  useless  cross-lines  in  the  sky. 
I here  confine  myself  to  the  landscapes  in  the  Journal:  most  of  the  figure  subjects,  whether 
from  the  works  of  native  or  of  foreign  artists,  being  my  own  engraving,  which  therefore  I 
may  be  allowed  to  pass  by.  Two  handsome  volumes,  American  Painters  and  Landscape  in 
American  Poetry , issued  last  year,  contain  the  best  of  the  more  artistic  work  of  the  Journal : 

the  latter  volume  with  drawings  on  the  wood  by  T.  Appleton  Brown,  engraved  by  Anthony, 

Harley,  Lauderbach,  Bobbett,  Andrew,  and  myself.  At  page  88  here  I would  remark  on  another 
specimen  of  cross-lining,  in  the  sky  and  water;  the  effect  produced  being  a certain  degree  of 
luminousness,  pleasant  and  well  worth  the  care  bestowed.  The  same  treatment  applied  to  grass 
and  herbage  is  not  equally  satisfactory.  A large  amount  of  illustrations  of  “ Art-manufacture  ” 
occupied,  I suppose  of  necessity,  the  pages  of  the  Art  Journal  during  and  after  the  Centennial 
year.  There  was  not  much  room  for  more  than  mechanical  engraving  in  these. 


HARPER’S  WEEKLY  JOURNAL 


43 


Datur  Kora  Quieti.  — Engraved  by  Annin. 

From  “ Harper’s  Monthly  Magazine.5’ 


The  years  of  National 
or  International  Exhibitions 
do  not  seem  to  be  of  much 
advantage  to  Art.  I find  but 
two  noteworthy  attempts  to 
improve  the  occasion  in 
1876.  A Century  After , 
published  by  Allen,  Lane, 

& Scott,  Philadelphia,  hard- 
ly fulfils  the  promise  of  its 
prospectus,  “ to  illustrate 
this  city  and  this  State  with 
engravings  unapproached  for 
artistic  beauty,  spirit,  and 
accuracy  by  any  previous 
publication.”  The  engrav- 
ings, from  designs  by  Dar- 
ley,  Moran,  Woodward, 

Hamilton,  Schell,  Bensell, 
and  W.  L.  Sheppard,  show 
nothing  different  from  the 
works  I have  already  reviewed.  Harley,  Ouartley,  and  Morse  maintain  their  pre-eminence. 
There  is  an  honest,  unpretentious  cut  by  F.  Juengling,  a Scene  in  St.  Mary  Street , at  page 
185  ; and  Lauderbach’s  cuts  are  also  neat  and  creditable.  I would  be  glad  to  write  up  the 
Philadelphia  engraving,  having  hitherto  been  so  confined  to  the  Empire  City  and  the  Hub;  but 
indeed  material  is  wanting.  Pioneers  in  the  Settlement  of  America , in  two  volumes  (Samuel 
Walker  & Co.,  Boston,  on  the  monthly  covers,  Estes  & Lauriat  on  the  title-page),  is  of  a 
higher  character with  designs  by  Darley,  vigorous  as  of  old,  Sheppard,  Perkins,  Waud,  and 
Reinhart.  No  names  appearing,  I can  only  speak  of  the  engraving  as  done  under  the  careful 
superintendence  of  Mr.  John  Andrew;  adding  that  some  of  my  own  may  be  detected  by  the 
white  line  by  whoever  is  curious  enough  to  further  pursue  that  inquiry. 

Referring  again  to  Harper's  Weekly , I may  take  the  three  years,  1877,  ’78,  and  ’79,  as  fair 
specimens  of  progress  in  the  paper.  The  list  of  designers  for  it,  and  of  painters  whose 
work  is  copied  for  it,  is  excellent.  Better  names  are  not  to  be  had  than  Abbey,  Reinhart, 
Shirlaw,  Church,  Perkins,  Julian  Scott,  E.  W.  Perry,  Eytinge,  Champney,  all  appearing  in  these 
years.  I do  not  think,  though,  that  the  engraving  has  improved  commensurately.  Certainly, 
there  is  the  improvement,  almost  unavoidable  after  long  practice,  in  the  management  of  tints: 
some  are  very  admirable,  as  mechanism.  I allow,  also,  a greater  feeling  for  tone  and  quality 
of  line  is  shown  occasionally,  and  effects  of  light  and  shadow  are  more  cared  for.  Men  can 
hardly  work  constantly  without  some  gain  both  in  perception  and  ability.  But  estimating  the 
general  character  of  the  engraving , it  bears  yet  the  stamp  of  newspaper  work,  of  which  I have 
already  spoken,  perhaps  sufficiently.  Carelessness  has  walked  hand  in  hand  with  knowledge, 
and  the  result  of  the  combination  has  been  slovenliness;  for  which,  I think,  the  artists  have 
been  more  to  blame  than  the  engravers.  Nast’s  caricatures,  bold  and  exactly  lined,  were  of 
great  use  in  the  mere  mechanism  of  fac-similc,  but  the  mechanical  dexterity  thus  obtained 
availed  not  much  in  washed  drawings,  where  the  engraver  has  to  first  learn  the  meaning  of 
form,  substance,  and  place,  and  then  to  invent,  that  is,  design , the  lines  which  shall  best  express 
these.  Little  of  this,  outside  of  mere  color  and  gradation  of  color,  is  to  be  found  throughout 
the  series  of  subjects  which  in  Harper's  Weekly  ought  to  have  given  full  scope  for  experiment 
and  practice.  The  best  things  I find  arc  the  portraits;  and  it  is  hard  to  say  why  men  who  can 


44 


HARPER’S  WEEKLY  JOURNAL 


manage  so  difficult  a branch  of  art  should  com- 
mit such  utter  failures  in  even  the  simplest 
landscape.  It  may  be  that  the  vagueness  and 
easy  inexactness  of  much  landscape  drawing  is 
not  permissible  on  portraits.  Certainly  the  best 
work,  by  far,  in  Harper s Weekly,  as  in  other 
newspapers,  is  to  be  found  in  the  portraits. 
Kruell’s  stand  out  as  the  best  of  these.  From 
his  best  I choose  the  portrait  of  Mr.  Fletcher 
Harper,  given  with  this  writing,  which  seems  to 
me  all  that  can  be  desired:  bold,  without  being 
coarse,  — form,  color,  and  tone  well  cared  for, — 
the  drawing  everywhere  good,  and  differences  of 
substance  well  distinguished.  I find  another 
portrait,  almost  as  good  (by  Kruell  and  Reuter), 
in  Vol.  XXI.,  for  1877,  — a portrait  of  Dr. 
Muhlenberg,  — the  only  fault  in  which  is  that 
the  fur  of  the  dress,  etc.,  has  not  the  texture  of 
fur.  Good  cuts,  also,  of  figure  subjects  there 
certainly  are,  beside  the  portraits ; but  too  many 
of  them  only  good  so  far  as  daring  disregard  of 
traditional  rules  maybe  called  good,  — not  good 
in  an  engraver’s  judgment,  — good,  if  it  be  good 
to  get  over  the  ground  quickly,  careful  only  to 
keep  color  and  to  please  the  draughtsman  by 
catching  the  eccentricities  of  his  handling.  Prominent  among  such  I may  name  [I  content 
myself  with  a single  specimen,  not  chosen  with  any  personal  reference]  the  Milkmaid' s Song , 
engraved  by  T.  Johnson,  from  a drawing  by  Howard  Pyle,  in  the  number  for  July  19,  1879. 
The  engraver,  I suppose,  had  his  instructions;  and  I can  also  believe  that  his  engraving 
is  a very  faithful  and  close  representation  of  the  drawing.  Nevertheless,  it  seems  to  me,  as 
engraving,  utterly  weak,  inexpressive,  and  inefficient.  The  engraver  has  sacrificed  himself  to  the 
“artist,”  the  artist  who  seems  to  have  cared  rather  for  the  unessential  manner  of  his  work  than 
for  the  real  object  of  the  work  itself.  A good  dashing  Bewick-like  cut,  also  by  Johnson,  A 
Warning  to  City  Visitors,  after  Reinhart,  No.  1079,  September,  1877,  shows  what  the  engraver 
could  do  when  opportunity  offered. 

I take  such  engravings  as  that  of  the  Milkmaid' s Song,  and  id  genus  omne,  to  be  done  under 
the  dictation  of  young  painters,  who  not  unnaturally  presume  that  their  especial  manner  and 
affectation  are  of  more  importance  than  methods  of  engraving,  concerning  the  laws  and  neces- 
sities of  which  they  are  profoundly  ignorant.  It  is  no  new  thing.  I recollect  that  I once 
executed  an  engraving  [the  verb  may  require  executioner  instead  of  executor]  for  which  I 
received  an  offered  double  payment,  on  which  I was  sorry  to  be  employed,  and  of  which,  when 
finished  and  approved,  I was  heartily  ashamed.  The  drawing  was  by  Millais,  subject  Cleopatra, 
for  an  illustrated  Tennyson.  Unlike  some  later  painters,  he  had  drawn  it  most  carefully  on  the 
block  with  pen  and  ink,  that  there  might  be  no  mistake;  and  it  did  not  seem  unreasonable  in 
him  to  insist  that  his  lines  should  be  exactly  adhered  to.  • Only  he  was  not  aware,  or  did  not 
think,  that  even  his  ink  lines  had  variety  of  color,  and  that  the  engraving  would  be  printed  of 
one  uniform  blackness.  He  was  satisfied  with  the  result:  I considered  it  only  as  a piece  of 
unsightly  mechanism.  Knowing  better  than  he  did  the  capabilities  of  my  own  art,  I could  have 
rendered  in  one  third  of  the  time  all  that  he, sought  for,  except  the  unessential.  The  essential 
he  lost  in  seeking  for  what  was  worthless.  It  is  no  new  thing,  this  deliberate  preference  of  the 


DRAWN  BY  F.  W.  O.  DARLEY.  ENGRAVED  BY  W.  J.  LINTON. 


PORTRAIT  OF  FLETCHER  HARPER. 

ENGRAVED  BY  G.  KRUELL. 


FKuM  MAKPUK'S  "WLliULY.  " 


THE  QUESTION  OF  FINENESS 


45 


An  Afternoon  in  August.  — Engraved  ry  Morse.  — From  a Painting  by  A.  Quartley. 

From  “American  Painters,”  by  G.  W.  Sheldon.  Published  by  D.  Appleton  & Co. 

less  important,  though  the  fashion  in  this  country  be  but  set  of  late.  Not  that  due  attention 
to  even  the  least  important  is  to  be  disregarded ; only  let  it  be  due  attention.  Nor  has  all 
that  is  undue  arisen  from  the  presumption  of  the  untaught  draughtsman.  Part  has  come,  as 
before  said,  from  the  desire  to  do  something  beyond  what  has  been  already  done.  Given  the 
same  men,  and  no  new  talent,  it  might  fairly  seem  that  excessive  fineness  was  the  one  point 
on  which  they  might  excel.  Cole,  Smithwick,  Johnson,  Juengling,  Davis,  Bogert,  [I  am  not 
ill-naturedly  picking’ out  names,  nor  meaning  any  hint  of  depreciation,]  all  could  and  did  work 
in  a bolder  style  than  that  lately  prevalent.  Vigorous  and  masterly  work  by  them  is  to  be 
found  on  the  pages  of  Harper s Weekly  and  the  A l dine , and  in  cuts  done  for  the  American 

Tract  Society.  Shall  we  say  that  the  new  demand  for  always  fineness,  fineness  above  every- 

thing, is  only  a fashion,  — the  new  requirement  of  over-attention  to  unessentials  only  a passing 
fancy?  It  began  to  sprout  about  1875  or  1876.  Some  of  the  manifestations  of  this  fashion,  or 

fancy,  have  been  good.  King’s  engraving  of  an  Alley  in  Chinese  Quarter , San  Francisco, 

(drawn  by  Abbey  as  neatly  and  precisely  as  anything  by  Moran,)  in  Scribner  for  1875  (page 
281),  is  excellent,  and  not  too  fine  for  the  subject.  Fineness  also  was  necessary  in  Muller’s 
Signing  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence , after  Trumbull,  and  in  the  same  engraver’s  Penn's 
Treaty  with  the  Indians  (Scribner,  1876),  the  last  an  admirable  work  in  every  respect,  the 
other  not  improved  by  some  cross-lining  too  evidently  done  to  save  the  trouble  of  lightening 
the  tint  first  cut.  But  in  later  works,  after  Abbey’s  drawings  [I  am  in  no  way  reflecting  against 
his  talent  as  a designer,  while  criticising  his  manner  of  drawing  on  the  wood]  and  in  engrav- 
ings from  drawings  by  Pyle,  Church,  Reinhart,  and  others,  of  the  new  school  of  designers,  1 
find  not  only  an  appearance  of  too  great  desire  to  be  yet  finer  than  the  last  scratchiness,  but 
the  continually  increasing  subserviency  of  the  engraver  to,  not  the  knowledge,  but  the  ignorance 
or  the  capriciousness  of  the  draughtsman.  I take  hold  here  of  two  recent  works,  not  for  the 


46 


THE  HOUSE  BEAUTIFUL 


sake  of  fault-finding,  but 
because  what  I have  to 
say  of  them  will  more 
forcibly  explain  my  mean- 
ing. 

Surely  Mr.  Clarence 
Cook’s  House  Beautiful 
(Scribner,  Armstrong,  & 
Co.,  1878),  dealing  main- 
ly with  bedsteads,  tables, 
candlesticks,  and  other 
household  furniture,  need- 
ed not  the  combined  tal- 
ent of  Mr.  Lathrop,  Miss 
Oakey,  and  Mr.  Marsh, 
only  to  produce  an  affec- 
tation of  fine  imitative 
etching  and  careful  pseu- 
do-artistic rendering  of 
even  empty  space  behind 
the  furniture  to  be  repre- 
sented. “ Why  not  ? ” 
says,  perhaps,  my  reader. 
“ Why  not,  if  art  may  be 
rightly  employed  in  beau- 
tifying even  the  meanest 
thing  ? ” But  my  objection  is  not  to  the  artistry, 
but  to  the  pedantry  which  calls  itself  artistic. 
The  picture  of  a chair  or  a bedstead,  a sideboard 
or  a curtain,  does  not  require  an  elaboration  of 
cross-lining,  not  only  in  the  object  itself,  but  in 
the  space  surrounding  it.  It  is  no  better  for  the 
elaboration.  And  along  with  this  pretension  of 
conscientious  art,  this  dogmatic  assertion  of  the 


importance  of  every  line  drawn  by  the  designer,  however 

clumsily  or  undesignedly.  I find,  with  an  utter  disregard  of  all 
that  an  engraver  would  value  in  manipulation,  a disregard  also 
of  even  tolerably  correct  drawing.  No.  17,  a Friendly  Lounge , 
and  No.  18,  Now  do  be  Seated , may  serve  as  instances. 
Neither  lounge  nor  chair  has  any  nicety  of  construction: 
both,  whether  from  the  artist’s  inability  to  draw  or  from  the 
engraver’s  over-scrupulous  respect  for  that  infirmity,  are  rude,  and  have  a look  of  being 

damaged  or  worn  out.  Indeed,  both  are  out  of  drawing.  But  then  the  formless  shadow  of  the 
chair  is  cut  with  most  accomplished  Chinese  exactness;  every  line  of  the  drawing  has  been 
preserved ; and  with  the  same  slavish  dutifulness  the  engraver  has  followed  the  lines  marking 

grain  of  wood  upon  the  wall.  Grain,  I suppose;  but  it  is  so  emphasized  (literalness  some- 

times caricatures)  that  it  has  more  the  appearance  of  the  rough-hewn  and  partially  split  wood 
of  some  log-hut,  rather  out  of  character  with  the  “ beautiful  ” cushioned  lounge.  I take  these 
two  cuts  at  random:  they  are  by  no  means  exceptional  specimens  of  the  style.  There  is 

not  even  the  beauty  of  mechanical  correctness  in  the  drawing;  and  the  engraver  has  consented 


Engraved  by  Anthony. 

From  “ Landscape  in  American  Poetry.’ 
Published  by  D.  Appleton  & Co. 


ART  IN  AMERICA 


47 


to  what  he  should  have  known  was 
bad. 

But  those  who  would  see  the 
worship  of  the  unessential  in  all  its 
glory  I must  send  to  the  Boys'  Frois- 
sart (Scribner,  1879),  a book  for  the 
text  of  which,  indeed,  Mr.  Sidney 
Lanier  and  the  publishers  deserve  the 
especial  gratitude  of  Young  America. 

Let  the  examining  engraver,  how- 
ever, as  he  sees  the  cuts,  wonder  at 
the  thorough  contempt  for  anything 
like  meaning  or  beauty  of  line  there 
displayed.  Clouds,  smoke,  stone  walls, 
flesh,  ground,  drapery,  all  things  sup- 
posed to  be  represented,  are  jumbled 
together  in  most  admirable  obscurity 
(difficult  as  it  is  in  wood-engraving 
to  accomplish  the  obscure),  as  if  the 
lines  had  been  drawn  in  sand  and 
shifted  by  a whirlwind ; or  perhaps 
the  engraver  did  it  in  his  sleep, 
dreaming  he  had  an  impression  of 
the  designer’s  meaning. 

Contemporary  Art  in  Europe  ( 1 877 ) 
and  Art  in  America  (1879)  contain 
the  best  of  work  in  Harper  s Monthly , 
as  Scribner’s  Portfolio  of  Proofs  Study  from  Nature. 

(1879)  has  the  pick  of  Scribner  s Engraved  by  Hoskin,  after  A.  B.  Durand. 

Monthly  and  St.  Nicholas , the  From  “Art  in  America,”  by  S.  G.  W.  Benjamin.  Published  by  Harper  & Brothers. 

Proofs  most  carefully  printed,  showing  the  cuts  to  the  best  advantage.  Here  I am  again  con- 
fronted with  the  new  style,  — what  I have  (I  hope  not  unfairly)  characterized  as  an  endeavor  at 
excessive  fineness,  to  the  sacrifice  of  what  is  most  essential  in  engraving,  intelligent  drawing.  I 
have,  even  so  judging,  to  acknowledge  not  only  the  talent  of  the  men  so  employed,  but  also 
the  excellence  of  very  many  of  their  works.  In  speaking  severely  of  particular  cuts,  I am  not 
necessarily  denying  the  ability  of  the  engraver.  I entreat  my  readers  to  limit  their  application 
of  my  strictures  to  the  stated  subject  of  the  same;  and  again  and  again  to  recollect  that,  even 
where  condemnation  may  appear  to  be  general,  there  may  be  exceptions.  If  already  I have 
spoken  somewhat  sweepingly,  it  has  not  been  without  intention  of  amends,  which  I shall  have 
very  largely  to  make  in  reviewing  the  works  now  before  me. 

Art  in  Etirope  and  Art  in  America  are  so  much  of  the  same  character  as  regards  engraving 
that  it  is  needless  to  review  both.  I may  content  myself  with  notice  of  the  latter  work 
(Harpers,  1879-80).  No  list  of  engravers  is  published;  1 am  obliged  therefore  to  pass  by 
some  cuts  which  might  else  deserve  notice.  Two  of  the  best,  here  given,  may  speak  for  them- 
selves: Hoskin’s  Study  from  Nature,  after  Durand  (page  61),  — very  sound  and  delicate,  the 
feeling  of  the  painting  admirably  given;  and  J.  P.  Davis’s  Whoo ! (an  owl  and  rabbits,)  after 
W.  H.  Beard  (page  87),  — bird,  beasts,  and  landscape  well  cut,  with  nice  discrimination  of 
substance.  I do  not,  however,  see  any  value  in  the  cross-lines  on  the  sky;  and  there  is  a 
patch  of  perpendicular  crossing  under  the  owl  which  to  me  is  utterly  meaningless  and  offensive. 
I point  out  these  faults  because  they  arc  blemishes,  the  only  portions  to  be  objected  to  in  a 


48 


ART  IN  AMERICA 


very  excellent  engraving; 
also  because  I think  Mr 
Davis  too  good  an  en- 
graver to  need  the  aid  of 
so  slovenly  a method.  He 
could  have,  obtained  all 
the  delicacy  and  lightness 
he  required  with  pure  and 
simple  lines.  The  same 
fault  occurs  yet  more  fla- 
grantly in  other  cuts  to 
which,  but  for  that,  I 
could  have  given  unquali- 
fied praise : Annin’s  Altorf 
(page  64)  ; and  The  Scout 
(page  126);  Muller’s  On 
the  Sod  (page  127)  ; Birds 
in  the  Forest  (page  169), 
by  Smithwick  & French. 
In  this  last  the  birds  are 
remarkably  good  ; but  the 
cross-lining  behind  is  un- 
There  is  a good  cut  by 
the  same  engravers  (page  55),  A Surprise , after  William  Sidney  Mount.  Hoskin  has  two 
capital  cuts,  On  the  Kern  River  (page  99),  with  a pure  and  firm  line  and  good  gradation  of 
tone,  and  Beverly  Beach  (page  63),  very  delicately  rendered;  Kruell  has  some  first-rate 
portraits;  Harley,  a Winter  Scene  (page  84),  excellent  and  refined.  Wolf’s  clever  engraving 
from  a clever  sketch  by  Reinhart,  Washington  opening  the  Ball  (page  175),  gives  us  an  extreme 
specimen  of  the  new  “impressionist”  treatment:  trowel-work  and  brush-marks,  daubs  and 

scrapings  of  color,  instead  of  drawing;  and  definition  of  form  left  out  everywhere  except  in  the 
two  faces.  Smithwick  & French,  in  their  literal  fidelity  to  Abbey’s  Astonished  Abbe  (page 
187),  could  not  but  caricature  the  absurdity  of  the  drawing,  though  the  mere  chiaroscuro  is 
perfectly  kept.  And  Juengling’s  Bit  of  Venice  (page  185)  is  remarkable  for  a twisted  sky, 
which  elsewhere  might  pass  for  a crumpled  kerchief:  probably  true,  however,  to  the  drawing 
or  photograph  he  had  to  stick  to.  Other  cuts  deserving  of  remark  I reserve  till  I review 
seriatim  the  work  of  the  more  prominent  of  the  engravers  who  to  some  extent  have  proclaimed 
their  adhesion  to  a new  style  of  treatment.  The  work  by  various  hands  in  late  numbers  of 
Harper  and  Scribner  requires  consideration,  which  can  be  more  fairly  given  by  attention  to  the 
engravers  severally.  Its  merits  and  demerits  are  both  of  sufficient  importance  to  deserve  most 
careful  weighing. 


Whoo!  — Engraved  by  Davis,  after  W.  H.  Beard. 

From  “Art  in  America,”  by  S.  G.  W.  Benjamin.  Published  by  Harper  & Brothers. 

sightly,  and  the  unreturned  lines  give  a dirty  look  to  the  whole. 


CHAPTER  VII 


the  Harper  and  Scribner  men,  the  men  who  constitute  what 
may  be  called  the  New  School  of  Engraving  on  Wood,  Mr. 
Cole,  I think,  stands  fairly  at  the  head.  That  he  has  knowl- 
edge and  command  of  line  is  clear,  even  by  reference  only  to 
his  early  work  in  the  Aldine,  and  in  the  Christian  Weekly  and 
Child's  Paper  of  the  American  Tract  Society.  A Mother  of 
Egypt,  drawn  after  Bonnat  by  J.  S.  Davis  ( Aldine , Vol.  VII. 
p.  382,  January,  1874),  is  full  of  force:  the  lines  of  the  flesh 
decided,  one  might  say  harsh ; but  with  good  attention  to 
form,  and  with  thought  of  direction  of  line  as  expressive  of 
form.  The  dress,  dark  and  fine,  has  texture  as  well  as  draw- 
ing; the  background  is  firm  and  well-toned.  Another  engraving 
by  him,  after  Merle  (also  in  the  Aldine ),  has  the  same  qualities  of  form,  color,  and  texture,  if 
parts  are  perhaps  not  quite  so  good.  And  now  to  look  at  his  later  doings. 

The  first  of  the  series  of  portraits  by  which  his  name  has  been  made  prominent  appeared 
in  Scribners  Magazine  for  October,  1877:  a head  of  Hjalmar  Hjorth  Boycsen.  This  was 
followed,  in  the  next  number,  by  a portrait  of  Lincoln,  and,  later,  by  portraits  of  Bryant,  Long- 
felloiv,  Emerson,  Holmes,  Whittier,  and  others.  These  portraits  at  once  attracted  attention, 
admiration,  and  adverse  criticism.  They  deserved  all.  They  are  remarkable,  not  only  for 
unusual  fineness,  but  as  endeavors  at  new  results  in  wood-engraving.  They  are  admirable  as 
specimens  of  minute  and  careful  mechanism,  as  the  work  also  of  an  artist  conscientiously 
making  the  best  of  what  was  given  him  to  represent.  They  yet  are  open  to  criticism. 
The  Lincoln,  in  a different  style  from  the  rest,  has  the  look  of  a reduction  of  a poor  pen-and- 
ink  drawing,  in  which,  however  good  the  likeness,  the  draughtsman  had  not  command  of  his 
pen.  It  is  a drawing  which  any  practised  draughtsman  on  the  wood  could  have  done  better; 
and  the  engraver’s  chief,  if  not  only,  merit  is  that  he  has  well  preserved  even  its  weak- 
ness. The  other  heads  have  been  differently  treated.  Photographed  on  the  wood,  I sup- 
pose, the  engraver  has  lost  himself  in  trying  to  catch  the  manner  of  the  original  crayon:  not 
to  be  caught,  for  one  process  can  never  exactly  reproduce  another.  The  drawing  else  is  in 
its  essentials  very  admirably  repeated.  The  Boyesen  and  the  Holmes  arc  not  only  wonderful 
examples  of  microscopic  handling;  but  the  first  scries  of  lines  in  them  is  good,  as  line;  and 
only  softened,  not  obliterated,  by  after  crossing.  Still  the  effect  of  the  over-elaboration  is  to 
make  the  portraits  foggy,  to  destroy  variety  of  substance  (the  hair  of  the  Holmes  being  of  pre- 
cisely the  same-  quality  and  texture  as  the  flesh  and  the  shirt-collar),  and  to  give  the  whole  cut 
rather  the  appearance  of  some  phototype  from  a steel  plate  than  of  a wood-engraving:  a result 
not  quite  desirable.  In  the  Whittier,  the  engraver  returns  toward  the  ordinary  method  of 
engravings,  in  his  cross-lining  not  so  much  disturbing  the  first  series  of  lines.  It  is,  however, 


50 


SCRIBNER’S  PORTFOLIO  — COLE 


weaker  than  the  rest ; the  hair  is  still 
hardly  to  be  called  hair,  and  the  dress 
and  background  are  meaningless  tint,  not 
even  expressing  color.  The  Longfellow, 
the  Emerson,  and  the  Bryant,  all  of  the 
crayon  intention,  look  like  bad  lithogra- 
phy, unsatisfactory  unless  indistinctness 
be  a merit.  Nevertheless,  the  main  faults 
of  these  portraits,  after  seeing  the  origi- 
nals, 1 may  not  lay  to  Mr.  Cole’s  graver. 
Beside  having  to  forget  the  capabilities 
of  his  own  art  in  a vain  attempt  to 
imitate  the  unpleasant  peculiarities  of 
another,  he  had  also  to  represent  vague- 
ness, by  no  means  easy  to  do  with 
definite  lines.  Mr.  Eaton  himself  says 
( American  Painters,  page  173)  that  in 
the  Bryant  portrait  he  “ aimed  to  give 
prominence  to  the  principal  fact  of  his 
character,  to  reproduce  that  which  was 
most  really  Bryant,  — to  portray  the  real 
form  of  his  head  and  the  life  that  issued 
from  his  eyes.  Everything  was  kept  sub- 
ordinate to  the  sense  of  that  life ; every 
detail  of  the  hair  and  the  flesh  zvas  gen- 
eralized, hardly  a wrinkle  of  the  face  was 
preserved. In  the  words  I have  under- 
lined I find  the  excuse  for  Mr.  Cole’s 
short-coming.  He  had  to  engrave  the 
subordination.  In  the  original  drawing 
no  more  than  in  the  engraving  can  I 
see  either  the  principal  fact  of  Bryant’s 
character  or  the  form  of  his  head.  There  is  only  a fat-cheeked,  fluffy  face,  such  as  might  be 

caught  a glimpse  of  at  a spiritual  seance.  In  the  interest  of  art,  can  one  be  too  severe,  if  just? 

I turn  with  pleasure  to  the  better,  because  more  artistic,  work  which  Mr.  Cole  has  given  us. 

I can  best  observe  this  in  Scribner’s  beautifully  printed  Portfolio  of  selected  proofs.  The 
best  of  these  by  Mr.  Cole  (it  is  impossible  to  notice  all)  are,  it  seems  to  me,  Madame  Modjeska, 
Vedder’s  Young  Marsyas,  St.  Gaudens’s  Adoration  of  the  Cross,  and  Chase’s  Ready  for  the  Ride. 
Modjeska  as  Juliet  ( Scribner's  Monthly,  Vol.  XVII  p.  665),  engraved  from  a photograph,  is  very 
perfect:  extremely  fine,  but  not  unnecessarily  so:  the  line  on  the  face  firm  and  yet  delicate, 

the  details  of  the  white  dress  admirably  preserved,  the  line  nowhere  offensive,  but  helping  to 
express  both  form  and  material.  Some  want  of  clearness  in  the  shadows  is  evidently  owing  to 
the  printer;  but  on  the  whole  it  is  a beautiful  piece  of  engraving  (I  would  call  it  Mr.  Cole’s 
best),  one  worthy  of  any  engraver  of  the  old  time.  The  Young  Marsyas  ( Scribner , Vol.  XVIII. 
p.  169),  drawn  on  the  wood  by  the  painter,  is  even  more  minutely  lined  than  the  Modjeska,  and 
suffers  therefore:  ground,  hares,  and  trunk  of  the  tree  under  which  Marsyas  is  piping,  lacking 

distinction  of  substance.  As  showing  how  fine  work,  well  cut,  may  be  clearly  printed,  it  may 

however  be  counted  a success.  And  the  figure  of  Marsyas  is  thoroughly  good.  Against  the 
alto-rilievo  after  St.  Gaudens  (Vol.  XV.  p.  576)  I have  but  one  objection:  the  needless  varia- 
tion in  direction  and  character  of  line,  which  gives  a false  appearance  of  material,  as  if  the 


Ready  for  the  Ride. 

Engraved  by  T.  Cole,  after  W.  M.  Chase. 

From  “Scribner’s  Monthly  Magazine.” 


COLE  — JUENGLING 


Si 


work  were  composed  of  stone  and  wood  and  calico,  instead  of  one  homogeneous  substance. 

Ready  for  the  Ride  (Vol.  XVI.  p.  609),  if  not  so  ambitious  as  some  other  subjects,  may  be 

spoken  of  as  faultless.  The  dates  of  the  above,  not  noticed  in  choosing  them, . suggest  a steady 
improvement  in  the  engraver.  Of  other  subjects,  such  remarks  as  I have  to  make  do  not  lessen 
my  appreciation  of  Mr.  Cole’s  ability  and  talent.  In  the  Carrying  the  Boar s Head  (Vol.  XVIII. 
p.  702)  the  two  heads  are  admirably  done;  but  the  rest  of  the  picture  has  the  same  fault  that 
I found  in  the  Marsyas , — want  of  character  in  the  line,  insufficient  distinction  of  substance. 
The  light  and  shadow  is  excellent.  Italian  Fishermans  Hut , drawn  by  Mrs.  Foote  ( Scribner , 
Vol.  XVI.  p.  452),  suffers  from  the  weakness  of  over-refinement,  though  general  effect  and  color 
are  well  kept.  It  is  difficult  to  distinguish  water  from  earth ; the  cliffs  are  unsubstantial ; and 

the  distances  between  near  and  far  objects  are  altogether  lost.  There  was  no  fault  here  in  the 

drawing.  Mr.  Cole  does  not  succeed  with  Mrs.  Foote’s  drawings.  Santa  Cruz  Americana,  hers 
also  ( Scribner , Vol.  XVI.  p.  456)  [Note  the  dates  in  our  comparative  judgments],  has  lost  all 
the  manner  and  all  the  charm  of  the  original.  In  Walden  Pond,  by  Homer  Martin  (Vol.  XVII. 
p.  504)  he  has  done  better.  The  poetic  feeling  of. the  drawing  is  well  preserved.  It  is  not 
better  for  the  cross-lining.  In  Page’s  Sisters  (St.  Nicholas , Vol.  VI.  p.  145)  the  heads  are 
excellent ; the  rest  of  the  engraving  is  feeble,  scratchy,  and  formless.  Whistler’s  White  Lady 
(Scribner,  Vol.  XVIII.  p.  489),  very  carefully  engraved,  yet  more  careful  on  account  of  the 
uncertainty  of  the  photograph,  does  not  aid  my  recollection  of  the  picture.  The  weakness  of 
Fortuny’s  Piping  Shepherd  is  due,  I have  no  doubt,  to  the  original.  The  engraver  had  no  right 
to  contradict  the  master  artist.  And  yet  I think  he  had  a right  to  set  the  Griffin  at  Work 
(Vol.  XVII.  p.  461)  upon  solid  ground,  although  Mr.  Abbey  had  sketched  him  in  the  air. 
There  is  a limit  to  the  subserviency  of  an  engraver  (stalwart  or  wooden)  ; and  surely  the 
sketch  did  not  indicate  a necessity  for  perpendicular  cross-lines  in  the  sky.  All  these  cuts  my 
readers  will  find  in  the  Portfolio,  as  well  as  in  the  Magazine.  Enough  of  critical  fault-finding: 
not  spared,  because  Mr.  Cole  can  well  afford  to  bear  it.  He  has  in  him  the  potentiality  of  a 
great  engraver.  Only  let  him  be  not  afraid  to  have  clear  ideas  of  his  own  as  to  what  is  best 
to  aim  at;  and  be  careful  to  avoid  mannerism,  the  maggot  which  eats  out  the  core  of  great- 
ness. He  need  fear  no  competition  if  he  be  true  to  his  opportunities. 

Though  I have  placed  Mr.  Cole  at  the  head  of  this  new  school,  Mr.  Juengling  is  its  most 
remarkable  exponent.  With  his  name  also,  in  Harper  s Weekly  and  the  Aldinc,  I find  the  larger 

work ; but  even  in  that,  bold  and  vigorous  enough,  the  tendency  to  sacrifice  form  and  mean- 

ing to  mere  chiaro-scuro,  of  which  I am  always  complaining.  A portrait  of  Edison  in  his 
Workshop,  drawn  by  Muhrman  (Harpers  Weekly,  Vol.  XXIII.  p.  601),  may  emphasize  my 
meaning.  The  picture  is  effective  and  vigorously  drawn.  Edison  is  working  at  a charcoal  fire. 
The  rays  of  light  are  just  as  solid  and  tangible  as  the  man’s  hair,  while  a glass  bottle  on  the 
bench  is  as  woolly  as  his  coat,  which  again  is  no  woollier  than  his  face.  In  a small  or  hurried 
work  no  difference  of  material  had  perhaps  been  looked  for.  But  in  this  front  page  of  the 
paper,  very  elaborately  engraved,  with  endless  cross-line,  black  and  white,  we  have  a right  to 
expect  definition,  detail,  and  some  expression  Of  material  (not  only  of  the  material  of  the  draw- 
ing, which  may  have  been  only  a copy  or  photograph  of  our  favorite  crayon  drawing,  but  of 
the  differences  that  do  subsist  between  light  and  hair  and  wood  and  glass  and  wool  and  flesh) 

The  want  here  noted  is,  as  it  seems  to  me,  the  continued  want  in  all  Mr.  Juengling’s  most 

clever  work  (clever  as  it  certainly  is,  however  unsatisfactory),  not  hidden  even  by  the  super- 
fineness  of  later  years.  I would  prefer  (but  needs  of  criticism  compel)  to  pass  over  his  Kelly 
cuts,  with  the  greater  part  of  the  block  covered  with  an  utterly  useless  ruled  tint  (I  say  ruled 
because  it  is  as  mechanical  as  if  ruled),  and  the  lines  on  the  rest  of  the  engraving  in  defiance 
of  all  ordinary  laws.  I confess  that  it  may  be  only  conventional  sheepishness  that  orders  us  to 
represent  level  ground  by  level  lines;  but  it  is  hardly  more  reasonable,  however  independent,  to 
try  to  represent  the  same  with  perpendicular  lines  — not  even  crossed.  See  Scribner  for  1878, 


52 


JUENGLING 


Vol.  XVI.  p.  680,  Drop- 
ping Corn,  Juengling  after 
Kelly,  — figures  walking 
up  a perpendicular  wall, 
like  flies  on  a pane  of 
glass.  See  also  the  other- 
wise tasteful  bits  of  land- 
scape by  Abbey  on  pages 
1,  4,  and  5 of  Harper  s 
Monthly  for  June,  1879, 
excellently  cut  wherever 
the  engraver  was  content 
with  simple  lines,  spoiled 
wherever  he  had  oppor- 
tunity for  cross-hatching; 
the  draughtsman’s  care- 
lessness of  anything  like 
completeness  in  his  work 
serving  perhaps  as  war- 
rant for  certain  obtrusive  masses  of  the  vague,  patches  of  unsightly  cross-lines,  horizontal, 
perpendicular,  and  diagonal,  which  may  mean  sky,  which  may  also  be  only  a representation  of 
those  parts  of  the  block  free  from  the  artist’s  pencilling.  The  most  curious  instance  I find 
of  this  incompleteness  is  in  another  Juengling,  after  Howard  Pyle  (in  the  same  June  number, 
page  71),  where  half  the  block,  without  drawing,  is  yet  covered  with  engraver’s  work  of  this 
same  meaningless  character. 

I take  Mr.  Bellows’s  Parsonage  {Harper  s Monthly  for  September,  1879,  page  468,  also  in  Art 

in  America,  page  75)  as  the  best  piece  of  landscape  work  I know  of  with  the  name  of  Jueng- 

ling attached.  It  is  a very  beautiful  cut,  at  first  sight.  The  effect  is  capital;  it  is  evidently 
very  true  to  the  original;  and  I do  not  even  quarrel  with  the  perpendicular  lines  on  the  water. 
They  here  help  to  give  transparency.  Let  it  be  allowed  that  there  are  exceptions  even  to  the 
best  rules,  and  that  in  art  all  means  are  right  which  produce  a good  result.  The  cut,  I say, 
at  first  sight  pleases  me.  But  looking  more  closely,  as  an  engraver  and  critic  must,  I am  sorry 
to  observe  that  trees,  grasses,  and  cows  have  all  too  much  the  appearance  of  being  made  out 

of  chopped  hay.  And  what  can  I say  of  the  sky?  The  color  is  good;  it  looks  well  a little 

way  off:  but  we  are  tempted  to  examine  so  fine  and  finished  a piece  of  work.  It  is  a cloudy 
sky,  but  there  is  not  a cloud  in  it.  It  is  all  patches,  and,  taken  separately,  might  pass  for 
imitation  of — a quilt.  If  Mr.  Bellows  did  so  draw  — I mean  paint  — it,  I think  the  engraver 
might  still  have  been  a little  pleasanter  in  his  lines.  Yet  I admit  that  for  ordinary  magazine 
purposes  and  for  an  uneducated  public  it  may  be  pronounced  admirable  and  perfect. 

With  the  portrait  of  Whistler  ( Scribner , Vol.  XVIII.  p.  481,  — in  the  Portfolio  also,  which 
I believe  is  considered  Mr.  Juengling’s  chef- D oeuvre) , as  an  engraving,  I have  no  fault  to  find. 
As  a portrait  I had  not  objected  to  two  eyes.  But  if  the  painter  was  content  with  one  and 
a socket,  and  with  paint  in  place  of  drawing,  it  had  surely  been  impertinent  in  the  engraver  to 
have  emphatically  contradicted  him.  Paint,  to  the  very  sweep  of  the  brush,  never  was  better 
reproduced  on  wood  than  in  parts  of  this  cut.  Notwithstanding,  I might  suggest  that  the  cheek 
has  the  look  rather  of  wood  than  of  paint. 

I he  Whistling  Boy,  after  Currier  ( Scribner  for  May,  1880,  page  11),  may  have  the  same  ex- 
cuse for  being  as  the  portrait  of  Whistler.  Even  Mr.  Currier’s  admirers  allow  his  work  to  be 
ugly.  The  utter  contempt  for  modelling  in  the  face  and  the  disregard  of  drawing  everywhere 
are,  I have  no  doubt,  most  faithfully  rendered  by  his  engraver;  but  surely  Mr.  Currier  had  not 


JUENGLING  — KRUELL 


53 


time  to  draw  the  cross- 
threads of  that  white 
shirt,  far  too  white  for 
that  dirty,  slovenly  boy. 

Is  it  Mr.  Lathrop’s 
careless  drawing,  or  on- 
ly the  Juengling  man- 
ner, that  we  have  again 
in  the  portrait  of  Edison 
( Scribner  for  October, 

1879,  page  840)?  Here 
even  the  brush-marks 
are  a failure,  more  re- 
sembling clumsy  wood- 
carving. The  likeness 
may  be  correct ; but  any- 
thing more  weak  and 
unpleasant  as  an  engrav- 
ing I have  not  found. 

Am  I too  hard  upon 
the  Juengling  method? 

I think  not,  free  to  con- 
fess that  there  too  is 
talent,  which  may  be 
turned  to  good  account 
if  the  engraver’s  (or  his 
patrons’)  eccentricities 
can  be  got  rid  of. 

Very  different  is  the 
treatment  of  a head  by 
Mr.  Kruell.  I have  al-  James  A.  M.  Whistler.  — Engraved  by  F.  Juengling. 

ready  praised  his  por-  From  the  Original,  by  Whistler,  in  the  possession  of  Mr.  S.  P.  Avery. 

trait  of  Mr  Fletcher  From  “Scribner’s  Monthly  Magazine.1’ 

Harper,  in  Harpers  Weekly.  Another  portrait  of  Mr.  Harper,  after  Elliott,  came  out  in  Vol. 
LIX.  of  Harper  s Monthly , and  reappears  in  Art  in  America.  It  deserves  the  same  unmixed 
approval  as  was  given  to  the  larger  head : form  and  effect  well  cared  for,  no  meaningless  or 
offensive  lines,  every  line  drawn  with  the  graver,  the  face  well  modelled  and  made  out,  though 
not  a fourth  of  the  size  of  the  Juengling  heads  already  noticed.  Granted  some  difference  in  the 
drawings,  the  different  intention  as  well  as  the  different  method  of  the  engraver  is  no  less  appar- 
ent. I suppose  there  may  be  brush-marks  in  Elliott’s  picture,  some  manner  also,  to  be  caught 
if  important.  But  Mr.  Kruell  has  been  careful  not  to  caricature  such  small  matters,  — has 
cared  rather,  perhaps  only,  tS  give  us  a noble  portrait,  a good  likeness,  a picture  to  satisfy  both 
painter  and  critic.  This,  and  not  the  expression  of  accident  or  whim,  seems  to  me  to  be  the 
true  end  of  art.  So  aiming,  I am  not  surprised  that  Mr.  Krucll’s  portraits  are  always  good. 
This  head  after  Elliott  and  a portrait  of  William  Morris  Hunt  ( Harper's  Monthly  for  July,  1880, 
page  163)  will  compare  favorably  with  Mr.  Cole’s  Modjeska ; and  are  superior  to  Cole’s  Victor 
Hugo  ( Scribner , December,  1879):  I might  object  to  their  exceeding  fineness;  but  I can  find 
no  other  fault  with  them.  Perhaps  with  so  good  and  clear  engraving  even  that  fineness  is  not  a 
fault.  Again,  comparison  may  be  made  (this  for  the  sake  of  contrast)  of  these  heads,  or  of  a 
portrait  of  William  Ilowitt  by  Kruell  ( Harper's  Monthly , May,  1879,  page  853)-,  with  two  por- 


54 


KRUELL 


traits  of  Bayard  Taylor  ( Scribner , November  of 
same  year). 

The  Howitt  head  and  Cole’s  Taylor  are  en- 
graved in  the  same  manner,  what  I may  call  the 
old  manner,  of  lines  laid  with  care  for  regularity 
and  pleasant  disposition,  as  in  a steel  “ line- 
engraving.”  Mr.  Kruell’s  Howitt  head  is  the 
more  regular,  somewhat  more  formal  perhaps ; but 
with  more  decision  and  more  attention  to  differ- 
ences. The  beard  of  the  Cole  ( Taylor ) head 
is  not  hair,  but  floss-silk.  The  Juengling  Taylor , 
distinct  from  both,  is  but  a clever  scratchy  imi- 
tation of  a piece  of  bronze.  Here  again  the  es- 
sential has  been  sacrificed  to  the  unessential.  It 
is  bronfe-like,  rather  than  like  the  work  of  the 
sculptor  O’Donovan.  By  exact  attention  to  the 
minutest  scratch  it  gives,  I suppose,  a tolerable 
resemblance  of  the  original,  close  except  for  the 
art  left  out.  And  here  it  may  be  worth  remark- 
ing (not,  however,  with  reference  to  Mr.  O’Dono- 
van) that  the  artists  who  most  insist  on  the  value 
of  their  own  most  careless  and  unimportant  im- 
pressions are  the  very  men  who  require,  not  an 
impression  of  the  same,  but  strict  attention  to 
the  smallest  details,  however  vaguely  hinted  at, 
however  unintelligibly  impressed.  Mr.  Kruell  is  not  prone  to  this  imbecility.  His  hand  is  too 
vigorous  for  stencil-work.  Other  admirable  portraits  by  him  I could  enumerate;  but  enough  are 
already  mentioned  to  show  his  quality.  I may  not,  however,  pass  a noble  head,  the  Dauphin, 
after  a steel  engraving  from  a painting  by  Greuze  (St.  Nicholas , Vol.  VII.  p.  i ; in  the  Port- 
folio also). 

Nor  is  his  work  confined  to  portraits.  The  Young  Princes  in  the  Tower  (St.  Nicholas  for 
February,  1880)  is  excellent  in  every  respect.  Careful  in  drawing,  clear  in  definition  every- 
where, delicate,  with  strength  and  depth  of  color,  clean  in  line,  and  pure  in  tone  (I  speak  of  it  from 

a proof  before  me),  — it  reminds  me  of  the  best  of  Adams’s  work,  not  without  indication  beyond 

of  the  advantage  gained  by  the  more  ambitious  attempts  of  later  time.  Not  so  delicate  as  this, 

but  more  characteristic  of  the  engraver’s  normal  style,  is  the  capital  rendering  of  Vedder’s 
Phorcydes  in  the  June  number  of  the  AMERICAN  Art  Review  (here  given),  a piece  of  vigorous 
artistry  in  which  Mr.  Kruell  has  no  rival.  Especially  I admire  the  flesh  of  the  three  figures, 
and  the  good  drawing  (so  often  wanting)  of  hands  and  feet  as  well  as  faces.  Other  cuts  by 
him  in  the  American  Art  Review,  — the  portrait  of  Barye  (No.  1,  p.  13)  and  the  copies  of 
Hunt’s  Flight  of  Night  (also  here  given)  and  The  Discoverer , — I may  refer  to  as  further 
indorsement  of  the  praise  that  appears  to  me  to  be  his  due.  Mr.  Kruell,  I may  add,  has  no 
mannerism  to  get  free  from,  unless  it  may  be  called  mannerism  to  follow  any  rules  whatever. 
With  his  healthy  tendencies  and  the  power  of  hand  he  has  shown,  I think  he  may  be  trusted 
even  to  make  experiments.  He  will  not  quarrel  with  me  for  saying  some  more  variety  would 
not  hurt  him. 


William  Howitt.  — Engraved  by  G.  Kruell. 

From  “ Harper’s  Monthly  Magazine.” 


WILLIAM  CULLEN  BRYANT. 

T.  COLE.  DRAWN  BY  WYATT 


EATON. 


ENGRAVED  BY 


MODJESKA  AS  JULTET. 


ENGRAVED  BY 


COLE,  FROM  A PHOTOGRAPH. 


FROM 


RJBNKR'S  MONTHLY. 


CHAPTER  VIII 


Y age  Mr.  Marsh  is  anterior  to  the  “New  School.”  Yet,  with 
genius  that  should  have  taken  him  otherwhere,  he  has  led  to  it 
and  leans  toward  it.  He  has  been  handicapped  by  his  ento- 
mology. Artist  in  feeling,  and  capable  engraver  as  he  is,  yet  — 

Let  him  handle  his  graver  wherever  he  will, 

The  butterfly  shadow  hangs  over  it  still. 

I have  already  done  homage  to  his  incomparable  insect  work. 
He  stands,  with  all  his  talent,  as  a warning  against  mannerism : 
though  in  fairness  it  must  be  said  that  the  greatness  of  his 
mannerism  was  thrust  upon  him,  and  was  not  only  excusable, 
but  justified  by  necessity.  But  the  law  of  consequence  halts  not  for  justifications.  His  one 
solitary  exception  to  the  prevailing  manner,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  goes,  (and  I needed  proof 
to  convince  me  it  was  his,)  was  the  Robinson  Cru,soe  given  at  page  32.  I gave  it  to  show 
what  he  might  have  done  had  not  his  course  continued  from  beetles  to  La  Farge,  from  La  Farge 
to  beetles  again.  “ Nous  revenons  toujours  a nos  premiers  amours.”  Mr.  La  Farge’s  drawings 
(I  speak  here  only  of  his  manner  of  placing  upon  the  wood  his  most  imaginative  designs)  were 
most  unfortunate  practice  for  Mr.  Marsh.  The  broadest  Nast  drawings,  to  correct  his  tendency 
to  subtlety  and  over-refinement,  had  been  better  for  him.  “No  more  minuteness”  should  have 
been  his  motto:  instead  of  which,  his  reverence  for  the  higher  qualities  of  La  Farge’s  work  made 
him  the  slave  of  all  its  deficiencies  in  execution.  Those  Riverside  drawings,  — the  Wolf-Charmer 
and  others  of  that  La  Farge  series,  — original,  labored,  and  suggestive,  were  yet  of  real  detriment 
to  the  engraver.  They,  rather  than  the  insects,  may  be  considered  tne  beginning  of  the  “ New 
School.”  He  builded  worse  than  he  knew.  Submissive  toward  his  artist,  painfully  conscientious 
in  his  work,  there  is  yet  nothing  in  them  to  be  valued  by  an  engraver.  Four  other  drawings 
by  La  Farge  for  Songs  of  the  Old  Dramatists  (Hurd  & Houghton,  1873)  have  the  same  conditions. 
The  one  here  given  is,  I think,  the  best  specimen  we  have  of  Marsh’s  talent,  great,  but  belittled. 
See  how  daintily  he  has  treated  the  figure,  how  full  of  delicacy  and  feeling  is  the  principal  flower. 
But  the  figure  does  not  float  over  the  stream,  — it  sticks  against  the  unreceding  water;  and  the 
distant  leaves  and  flowers  are  as  close  to  you  as  is  the  foreground.  It  is  the  same  in  everything. 
There  is  no  distance.  Beetle  or  butterfly  texture  always,  and  generally  confusion.  A Simple 
Fireplace  (F.  Lathrop),  Aloft  on  the  Glittering  Shield  (Mrs.  Foote),  Little  Sign'd  (John  La  Farge), 
Still  Life,  Stndy  in  Oil  (R.  S.  Gifford),  — all  remind  us  of  the  Insects  injurious  to  Vegetation. 
In  the  Still  Life  we  are  in  doubt  as  to  what  is  flat  and  what  in  relief,  and  whether  the  vase 
holds  feathers,  or  flowers,  or  both,  so  confused  are  the  over-labored  textures.  Of  course  he  is 
perfect  in  an  Etruscan  Fan  of  feathers,  and  a little  bas-relief  of  The  Author  of  Home,  Sweet 
Home,  is  very  pure  and  charming.  For  all  these  I refer  my  readers  to  the  Portfolio  of  Proofs, 


56 


MARSH  — SMITHWICK  & FRENCH 


rather  than  to  the  pages  of  Scribner' s 
Monthly , that  my  strictures  may  not  be 
laid  to  the  charge  of  any  inferior  print- 
ing. I have,  perhaps,  been  severe  on 
Mr.  Marsh's  short-comings,  but  surely 
not  from  any  personal  prejudice.  There 
is  an  important  question  involved  in  the 
differences  I am  noticing,  — a question 
of  truth  or  falsehood  in  work,  a question 
be  it  only  said  of  better  or  worse  in  the 
methods  of  engraving,  which  I am  en- 
deavoring to  bring  out  and  clearly  to 
explain.  It  is  an  important  part  of  the 
History  of  Wood-Engraving  in  America. 

A bold  double-page  cut,  before  re- 
ferred to,  by  J.  G.  Smithwick,  from  as 
bold  a drawing  by  Reinhart,  will  repay 
the  trouble  of  looking  to  pp.  88,  89,  of 
Harper's  Weekly  Journal  for  1877  (Vol. 
XXI.  No.  1049).  It  is  a daring  piece  of 
genuine  white-line  work,  in  which,  with 
no  lack  of  self-assertion  on  the  part  of 
the  engraver,  the  drawing  and  manner 
of  the  draughtsman  have  been  fairly  re- 
produced. It  is  as  bold  (coarse  would 
not  be  the  right  word  for  it)  as  Ander- 
son’s boldest,  and  truly  in  the  style  of 
Bewick,  if  with  less  determined  drawing. 
It  is  this  larger  work  which  shows  the 
engraver’s  power.  Where  excessive  fine- 
ness comes  in  there  is  but  little  room 
for  distinguishing  manipulation.  Matters  not,  the  workman  may  say,  what  lines  come  here; 
they  will  be  too  fine  to  be  noticed.  So  he  fills  in  his  space,  as  he  might  if  he  had  a stencil- 
plate,  with  anything;  and  it  passes  if  he  but  keep  the  color.  Looking  at  this  Smithwick 

engraving,  one  wishes  the  engraver  might  always  find  employment  on  this  larger  scale.  He  has, 
however,  admirably  adapted  himself  to  the  smaller  needs  of  book  and  magazine  work.  Good 
cuts  by  him  will  be  found  in  Harper' s Monthly  for  1878-79,  one  very  good,  after  Miss  Jessie  Curtis 
(Vol.  LVII.  p.  805).  At  p.  816,  Vol.  LVIII.,  he  has  dropped  into  the  cross-line  inanity,  where 
I should  be  loath  to  leave  him.  He  is  too  strong  to  linger  among  the  handmaids  of  Omphale. 

Reynolds’s  Strawberry  Girl  (St.  Nicholas , Vol.  III.  p.  345)  and  Miss  Penelope  Boothby,  the 

frontispiece  to  the  same  volume,  (both  also  in  the  Portfolio, ) show  him  in  his  manlier  style. 
Another  work  of  his  I would  particularize  is  the  Adoration  of  the  Cross  (Harper's  Monthly,  Vol. 
LVIII.  p.  672,  Art  in  America,  p.  160),  drawn  by  Snyder,  after  St.  Gaudens,  the  same  subject 
and  of  the  same  size  as  Mr.  Cole’s,  remarkably  like  that  in  treatment,  and  equally  good. 
A Haystack,  after  Swain  Gifford  (Scribner  for  1878,  Vol.  XVI.  p.  516),  and  a Little  Cove  at 
Nassau  (Vol.  XV.  p.  28),  are  fair  specimens  of  his  ability  in  landscape;  and  of  his  small 
figures  I may  choose  for  praise  his  copy  of  the  Surprise,  after  Sidney  Mount  (Harper' s Monthly, 
Vol.  LIX.  p.  251,  and  Art  in  America,  p.  55).  His  figures  are  generally  good.  Flags,  eh? 

(Harper's  Monthly  for  July,  1880)  is  a fair  example.  But  what  does  he  mean  by  that  mass  of 
net-work  unde*  the  horse  and  cart?  It  makes  a positive  substance  of  the  shadow,  the  end  of 


Engraved  by  Henry  Marsh.  — Drawn  by  John  La  Faroe. 
From  ‘‘Songs  of  the  Old  Dramatists.”  Published  by  Hurd  & Houghton. 


SMITHWICK  & FRENCH  — KING 


57 


it  sticking  to  the 
dog’s  head.  A 
little  clean  outlin- 
ing (too  much 
neglected  under 
the  stencil  sys- 
tem) would  have 
prevented  other 
near  and  remote 
parts  of  the  cut 
from  sticking  to- 
gether. And  what 
is  the  use  or 
beauty  of  that 
ridiculous  cross 
white  line  in  the 
ground? 

I have  spok- 
en only  of  Mr. 
Smithwick;  but 
Mr.  French’s  name 
should  be  coupled 
with  his  partner’s 
in  many,  if  not  in 
all,  of  the  works  I 
have  here  noticed. 


The  Haystack. 

Engraved  by  Smithwick  & French.  — Drawn  by  R.  Swain  Gifford. 

From  “Scribner’s  Monthly  Magazine.” 


though 


The  double-page  cut  in  Harper  s Weekly  is,  I suppose,  by  Mr.  Smithwick  only. 
Mr.  F.  S.  King  seems  to  have  an  affection  for  birds  and  fish,  as  well  as  for  landscapes, 
able 


he  is 
also  in  figures.  On 
the  Edge  of  the  Or- 
chard, by  Swain  Gif- 
ford ( Scribner , Vol. 
XVI.  p.  513),  is  thor- 
oughly good.  So  also 
is  the  Sea  Raven  and 
Toad-Fish,  by  J.  C. 
Beard  (Vol.  XIII.  p. 
589).  The  Birthplace 
of  John  Howard  Payne 
(Vol.  XVII.  p.  472), 
“ from  a charcoal  draw- 
ing,” carefully  labored, 
has  the  look  of  a poor 
lithograph  or  process 
“engraving.”  The 
Bobolink,  an  earlier 
work  (Vol.  XII.  p. 
488),  is  bright  and 
excellently  cut.  Mr. 
King  knows  how  to 


KING 


53 


give  value  to  his  blacks;  for  which  I may 
refer  also  to  the  Plaza  at  Retaluleu  (Vol. 
XV.  p.  621).  The  Return  from  the  Deer 
Hunt  (Vol.  XIV.  p.  519)  and  Morning  at 
Jesse  Conklings  (Vol.  XVII.  p.  460)  are 
as  good  specimens  of  fine  landscape  en- 
graving as  I have  seen  anywhere.  The 
first,  a snow  scene,  is  very  striking;  the 
figures  in  it  are  also  well  cut.  The  same 
may  be  said  of  the  figures  in  Snowballing 
(Vol.  XVII.  p.  39).  Snow  Buntings,  by 
Miss  Bridges  (Vol.  XII.  p.  485),  another 
snow  scene,  is  equally  good,  and  for  dif- 
ference of  style  may  be  contrasted  with 
Marsh’s  Humming  Birds,  by  Riordan  (Vol. 
XVII.  p.  161),  — the  difference  between 
clearness  and  bewilderment,  — perhaps  in 
some  measure  owing  to  the  drawing.  All 
these  engravings  by  Mr.  King  will  be  found 
in  the  Portfolio  of  Proofs.  I refer  also  to 
the  magazine  for  the  benefit  of  those  who 
have  not  the  proofs ; also  because  the 
magazine  references  show  the  order  of 
time  in  which  the  works  were  done.  Other 
notably  good  works  by  the  same  hand  are 
the  Modjeska,  after  Duran  ( Scribner , Vol. 
XVII.  p.  668),  as  good  in  its  way,  if  not 
so  important  an  engraving,  as  Mr.  Cole’s 
Modjeska,  at  p.  470,  with  which  it  may  be 
well  to  compare  it ; and  a marvellously 
elaborated  Peacock's  Feather  ( Harper's 
Monthly,  Vol.  LVII.  p.  384,  1878),  capi- 
tally drawn  by  W,  H.  Gibson,  a cut  alto- 
gether worthy  of  Marsh.  Butterflies  (Vol. 
LIX.  p.  385),  by  the  same  artist,  do  not 
equal  those  by  Marsh,  but  are  good,  though 
the  cut  is  spoiled  for  want  of  distinction 
between  the  butterfly  texture  and  the  texture  of  the  flowers.  Mr.  King’s  tints,  whether  of  sky 
or  of  ground  or  water,  are  full  of  tone,  pure  in  line,  and  sweet  in  gradation.  I would  praise 
especially  a cut  in  Harpers  Monthly  for  1879  (Vol.  LIX.  p.  13),  a ghostly  figure  by  Abbey, 
exceedingly  fine  in  cutting,  the  flesh  nicely  stippled,  the  gauzy  drapery  well  rendered,  and  the 
color,  ranging  from  solid  black  to  the  positive  white  of  the  lightning,  excellently  emphasized 
and  gradated : the  whole  very  painter-like  and  effective.  And  yet  one  more  must  not  pass 
unnoticed,  — the  Falls  of  the  Blackzvater  ( Harpers  Monthly  for  July,  1880,  p.  181),  than  which 
I know  of  nothing  more  truly  refined,  more  pure  and  delicate.  1 only  quarrel  with  fine  work 
vhen  it  has  nothing  but  fineness  to  recommend  it.  Fine  as  this  cut  is,  the  graver  drawing  is 
good  throughout. 

Mr.  Hoskin’s  landscapes  have  the  same  delicately  discriminating  quality  as  those  by  Messrs. 
King  and  Smithwick  & French.  I know  his  work  only  in  Harper's  Monthly,  and  in  the  reprint, 
Art  in  America.  I he  cut  I have  given  at  page  47  is  a fair  specimen  of  his  ability.  On  the 


Modjeska. 

Engraved  by  F.  S.  King,  after  Carolus  Duran. 

From  “Scribner’s  Monthly  Magazine.” 


THE  PHORCYDES. 

ENGRAVED  BY  G.  KRUELL,  AFTER  E.  VEDDER. 


"THE  AMERICAN  ART  REVIEW. 


FROM 


"THE  AMERICAN  ART  REVIEW.” 


HOSKIN  — WOLF 


59 


Kern  River  ( Art  in  Ameri- 
ca, p.  99)  is  very  good : 
the  line  firm,  with  excellent 
gradation  and  tone.  Other 
of  his  work  I may  conven- 
iently notice  in  the  number 
of  Harper  s Monthly  for 
September,  1879  (three 
cuts  at  pp.  484,  485,  and 
487).  That  after  Casilear 
is  of  his  best,  not  bettered 
by  those  useless  perpen- 
diculars again  in  the  sky; 
the  Hubbard  is  weak,  yet 
more  weakened  by  still 
worse  perpendicularity ; and 
in  the  Sunset  on  the  H7id- 
son,  Sandford  R.  Gifford, 
what  might  have  been  an 
excellent  piece  of  tone  is 
spoiled  by  the  same  lazy 
offensiveness.  I say  lazy, 
because  it  seems  to  me 
that  much  of  this  cross- 
lining is  done  only  to  save 
the  trouble  of  considering 
direction  of  lines  in  the 
first  place,  or  of  thinning 
too  thick  lines  when  the 
effect  requires  that.  I set 
it  down  as  generally  a mere 
trick  of  laziness.  I make 
amends  to  Mr.  Hoskin  for  The  Mowing. 

this  remark,  by  no  means  Engraved  by  H.  Wolf.  — Drawn  by  Alfred  Fredericks. 

aimed  personally  at  him  From  “Art  ill  America,”  by  S.  G.  W.  Benjamin.  Published  by  Harper  & Brothers. 

by  calling  attention  to  another  of  his  works,  the  Old  Mill  {Harper  s Monthly  for  July,  1880, 
p.  174),  to  which,  save  for  still  a slight  glimpse  of  my  perpendicular  bete  noire,  I am  happy  to 
give  unstinted  praise.  I find  that  I have  picked  out  three  cuts  from  that  last  July  number  of 
Harper  for  especial  commendation.  There  is,  indeed,  a remarkable  amount  of  good  work  in  it, 
as  there  is  in  most  of  the  later  numbers  of  the  magazine,  — one  especially  good,  The  Errand, 
by  Johnson  (p.  52,  June,  1880),  — mixed  unfortunately  with  much  that  is  poor  or  bad.  Is  there 
no  such  monster  as  an  editor  with  pictorial  judgment? 

Mr.  Wolf  is  not  to  be  overlooked,  but  I must  now  be  content  with  choosing  a few  cuts 

indicative  of  the  engraver’s  ability.  He  answers  to  the  roll-call  of  the  New  School,  and  what  I 

have  already  given  of  that  may  suffice  without  much  further  illustration.  The  Mowing  ( Harper  s 
Monthly,  July,  1879,  Art  in  America,  p.  165),  though  over-elaborated  [there  was  no  occasion 

for  the  cross-threads  on  the  girl’s  dress,  and  her  face  and  some  of  the  herbage  are  of  the  same 

fabric],  is  else  a good  cut.  The  Start  Viva  ( Scribner , Vol.  XVII.  p.  713)  is  not  without  merit: 
but  why  (I  am  always  on  the  same  quest)  arc  distant  wall,  fiat  ground,  drapery,  dust,  and 
horse-hair  all  apparently  worked  in  cross-stitch?  Seeking  Pasturage  (Vol.  XVII.  p.  480)  has 


6o 


MULLER  — DAVIS 


good  graver  work  in  it.  Is  it 
the  draughtsman’s  fancy  that 
the  starved  sheep  are  all  wool- 
less? 1 guess  it  is  but  another 
case  of  the  perhaps  artistic 
engraver  sacrificed  to  the  un- 
artistic  idleness  or  incapacity 
of  his  draughtsman.  Much  cry 
on  the  designer’s  part,  but  no 
wool ! These  two  cuts  will  be 
found  also  in  the  Portfolio. 
A very  noticeable  Wolf  will 
be  found  in  Scribner  for  May, 
1880  ( p.  5 ) , Feeding  the  Pigeons , 
after  Walter  Shirlaw.  The  cut 
is  very  delicately  gray,  with  fine 
accentuation  of  the  blacks  in 
the  pigeons.  But  everything 
is  flat,  without  distance  or 
definition  of  form.  Patches  of 
the  girl’s  dress,  her  cap,  her 
face,  distant  wall,  pigeons’ 
backs,  — all  are  of  the  same 
material.  Look  also  (in  the 
same  number,  p.  7)  at  Oyster 
The  Start  y iva.  Gatherers.  The  sky  may  be 

Engraved  by  H.  Wolf.  — Drawn  by  G.  Inness,  Jr.  torn  sail-cloth,  or  blocks  of 

From  “Scribner’s  Monthly  Magazine.”  ice,  Qr  WOod-Carving  : there 

is  not  even  the  shape  of  cloud.  Supposing  this  to  be  the  painter’s  whim,  one  does  not  the  less 
feel  it  to  be  a degradation  that  for  any  reason  whatever  an  engraver  should  be  compelled  to 
repeat  it. 

Has  imitation  of  lithography  become  the  bean-ideal  of  Mr.  Muller?  His  Banito  and  his  Pet 
(St.  Nicholas , Vol.  VI.  p.  80),  in  the  Portfolio  as  an  example  of  his  style,  would  seem  to  imply 
so  much.  “Drawn  by  Mary  Hallock  Foote”:  yet  not  a suspicion  of  her  pencilling  is  there. 
Was  it  a rough  sketch,  reduced  for  the  magazine,  a loose  vignette,  and  then  squared  out  with  a 
gray  background  of  machine  work?  Her  design  is  there,  but  nothing  of  her  dainty  hand-work. 
And  yet  the  New  School  prides  itself  in  exact  reproduction  of  brush  and  trowel  marks,  and 
perfect  imitation  of  artistic  touch,  from  charcoal  to  pen  and  ink.  Mr.  Muller  has  done  better 
things,  already  referred  to.  I notice  this  cut,  not  so  much  for  rebuke  of  his  apparent  tenden- 
cies, as  to  point  out  what  may  fairly  be  expected  under  the  present  unintelligent  regime.  On 
the  Old  Sod  (Harper's  Monthly , October,  1879)  will  do  more  justice  to  Mr.  Muller.  But  those 
lazy  perpendiculars  again!  And  in  A Sing  on  Monhegan  Island  (p.  345,  Harpers  Monthly  for 
July,  1880),  why  are  the  walls  and  ceiling  plastered  with  cobwebs?  Is  it  characteristic  of  the 
Maine  islands? 

I must  hasten  through  my  task  of  criticism.  There  is  no  use  in  multiplying  instances.  Mr. 
J.  P.  Davis,  like  Mr.  Marsh,  is  one  of  the  older  men.  But  his  style  has  changed  with  the 
times ; or,  rather,  he  has  lost  his  earlier  style  through  following  the  conceits  of  others.  Cradling , 
Tiffany  (Scribner,  Vol.  XIV.  p.  529),  and  Roxy,  Walter  Shirlaw  (Vol.  XVI.  p.  792),  sufficiently 
indicate  his  recent  work.  Mr.  Charles  Coghlan  as  Charles  Surface,  Abbey  (Vol.  XVII.  p.  777), 
may  show  how  far  he  has  wandered.  One  of  his  best  landscapes  is  here  reprinted  from 


J.  H.  WHITNEY  — LEBLANC  — KILBURN 


6 1 


the  American  Art  Review. 

Color  and  general  form  seem 
excellently  kept ; but  the  fore- 
ground lines  are  meaningless, 
and  I can  see  no  reason  for 
the  complication  of  lines  in 
the  sky.  The  tone  of  the 
whole  is,  however,  of  admi- 
rable quality.  One  thing  to 
be  noticed  in  all  this  super- 
fine work  is,  that,  however  di- 
verse the  original  genius  of 
the  men,  when  they  are  drilled 
into  superfineness  their  work 
is  scarcely  distinguishable. 

This  utter  subordination  of 
the  engraver  destroys  his  in- 
dividuality. Having  no  indi- 
viduality of  his  own,  will  he 
be  better  able  to  appreciate 
the  individuality  (the  real  per- 
sonality, I do  not  say  only 
the  outer  clothes)  of  the 
painter?  J.  H.  Whitney  does 
a perfect  piece  of  patient  fac- 
simile in  his  cut  of  Joe  ( Scrib- 
ner, Vol.  XVIII,  p.  491,  and 
Portfolio') . In  endeavoring  to 
reproduce  The  Morning  Stars, 
after  Blake’s  wonderful  etch- 
ing ( Scribner , June,  1880,  p. 

237),  he  has  simply  attempted 
an  impossibility.  For  his  very  On  the  Old  Sod. 

failure,  however,  he  deserves  Engraved  by  R.  A.  Muller,  after  William  Magrath. 

much  credit.  It  IS  remark-  From  “Art  in  America,”  by  S.  G.  W.  Benjamin.  Published  by  Harper  & Brothers. 

ably  close  to  the  original.  The  Haden  etchings  ( Scribner , August,  1880)  are  failures  altogether 
as  representations  of  the  larger  etchings.  They  only  give  the  subjects  of  the  originals.  I must 
point  to  one  more  example  of  the  Microscopic,  — Leblanc’s  reproduction  of  the  frontispiece  to 
George  Cruikshank’s  Table-Book  ( Scribner , Vol.  XVI.  p.  172).-  If  this  sort  of  thing  be  — can  it 
be?  — carried  further,  Messrs.  Harper  and  Scribner  will  have  to  atone  by  endowing  a hospital  for 
blind  wood-engravers.  And  still  another  calls  for  notice,  — Mr.  Kilburn’s  Sand  Dunes  ( Scribner , 
July,  1880,  p.  365).  I certainly  do  not  give  it  as  a sample  of  Mr.  Kilburn’s  work,  but  as  the 
crowning  mercy  of  the  “ New  School.”  I can  best  describe  it  as  a Jucngliug  by  machinery. 
May  I hope  that  Mr.  Kilburn  has  invented  a machine  for  the  saving  of  our  threatened  sight? 

lo  what  are  we  tending?  I have  carefully  examined,  I believe,  everything  that  has  been 
done  by  this  new  school,  whose  works  both  grace  and,  1 think,  disgrace  the  pages  of  our  two 
most  enterprising,  most  liberal,  and  most  deservedly  successful  magazines  l think  I have  not 
been  slow  in  recognizing  talent,  nor  stingy  in  awarding  praise.  But  how  much  of  the  talent  is 
misapplied : for  I can  but  call  it  misapplied  when  it  is  spent  on  endeavors  to  rival  steel  line- 


eng 


graving  or  etching,  in  following  brush-marks,  in  pretending  to  imitate  crayon  work,  charcoal 


62 


THE  CHINESE  METHOD 


or  lithography,  and  in  striving  who  shall  scratch  the  greatest  number  of  lines  on  a given  space, 
without  thought  of  whether  such  multiplicity  of  line  adds  anything  to  the  expression  of  the 
picture  or  the  beauty  of  the  engraving.  Talent!  there  is  no  lack  of  it.  My  list  of  capable 
engravers  has  left  out  many,  and  I have  but  given  a few  samples  of  a vast  amount  of  work. 
Possibly  it  will  seem  to  some  that  they  have  been  neglected,  that  such  and  such  engravings 

at  all  events  should  have  had  honorable  mention.  So  should  it  have  been  had  there  been 

no  limit  to  my  history.  It  had  been  a pleasure  to  have  honored  even  the  youngest  of  the 
rising  men,  to  have  done  fuller  justice  to  those  known.  After  all,  the  melancholy  reflection 
would  have  been  but  the  more  deeply  impressed  upon  me,  — How  much  of  talent  is  here 
thrown  away,  how  much  of  force  that  should  have  helped  toward  growth  is  wasted  in  this 
slave’s  play  [call  it  gladiatorial,  and  own  yourselves  hired  or  condemned  to  do  it],  for  a prize 
not  worth  having,  the  fame  of  having  well  done  the  lowest  thing  in  an  engraver’s  art,  and  hav- 
ing for  that  neglected  the  study  of  the  highest!  For  it  is  the  lowest  and  last  thing  about  which 
an  artist  [and  it  is  only  to  the  artist-engraver  that  I care  to  appeal]  should  concern  himself, 
this  excessive  fineness,  this  minuteness  of  work.  It  might  have  its  worth,  though  there  not  so 
important  as  it  seems,  in  the  copying  of  old  missals  [see  illustrations  to  A Famous  Breviary,  in 
Harper  s Monthly  for  February,  1880]  ; at  least  it  is  not  out  of  place  in  work  such  as  that, 

better  befitting  the  indolent  hours  of  monks  than  the  stirring  lives  of  men  who  should  be 
artists.  I do  not  say  there  is  no  good  in  it.  While  acknowledging  its  cleverness,  I recognize 
also  something  to  be  gained,  — a niccness  of  hand  that  may  be  usefully  employed.  But  in 
engraving,  as  in  other  branches  of  art,  the  first  thing  is  drawing;  the  second,  drawing;  the 
third,  drawing.  Form,  beauty  of  form,  and  place  — perspective  and  distance:  until  you  can 
express  these,  you  have  not  even  the  beginnings  of  your  art.  When  you  have  mastered  these, 
and  with  many  or  few  lines  can  make  these  understood,  go  on  to  differences  of  substance,  and 
beauty  and  harmony  even  of  lines.  After  which  you  may  refine  as  much  as  pleases  you, 

provided  you  do  not  destroy  intelligibility  or  strength.  I know  no  surer  recipe  for  making 
good^  engravers.  It  is  all  drawing  with  the  graver,  or  it  is  not  engraving  at  all,  — not  worthy  to 
be  so  called. 

I am  aware  that  there  is  another  method,— -the  mechanical,  the  Chinese,  the  stencil-plate 
method.  You  can  take  your  choice:  either  to  trust  to  your  own  understanding,  or  to  grow  a 
pig-tail,  and  follow  your  “artist”  blandly  in  Chinese  fashion.  The  second  may  for  a time  be 
the  more  profitable,  as  well  as  the  safer  method,  and  will  certainly  be  most  pleasant  to  any 
number  of  young  painters  or  designers  of  vagueness,  your  want  of  understanding  dovetailing 
into  and  assisting  theirs.  I say  this  is  the  safer  method ; for  an  independent  understanding,  or 
say  only  a respectful  endeavor  to  do  something  that  may  be  understood,  will  possibly  lead  you 
astray.  I have  heard  of  an  engraver,  and  one  of  fair  age  and  reputation,  who,  striving  to  make 
something  out  of  his  painter’s  touches  of  white,  engraved  a stream  with  foam-edged  waves ; and 
lo  1 the  artist  intended  it  for  a field  of  daisies.  Over  the  just  wrath  of  that  artist,  who  might 
have  prided  himself  on  his  botanical  correctness,  I draw  a hasty  veil;  but  the  unhappy  engraver  — 
has  gone  about  with  a pig-tail  ever  since.  The  misadventure  might  fairly  warn  him  off  too 
conceited  a dependence  on  himself;  and  yet  I think  his  course  of  action,  fail  as  it  might  in 
certain  instances,  was  the  right  course  after  all.  And  he  has  found  draughtsmen  on  the  wood, 
and  painters  also-,  who  thought  his  engraving  better  for  his  understanding  of  what  they  drew  or 
painted,  and  who  were  not  too  arrogant  to  allow  that  he,  better  than  they,  might  know  the 
opportunities  and  limitations  of  his  own  art. 

And  here  let  me  confess  to  my  brothers  in  engraving  afflictions,  that,  however  hardly  I may 
have  dealt  with  them  in  these  my  criticisms,  it  has  been,  in  the  first  place,  not  from  desire  to 
censure,  but  out  of  an  earnest  wish  for  their  benefit  and  the  improvement  of  our  art;  and,  in 
the  second  place,  I have  borne  in  mind  a saving  clause.  Not  they,  the  engravers,  have  chosen 
to  bow  down  to  brush-marks,  to  blind  themselves  with  what  soon  will  be  altogether  unprintable 


EXPLANATION 


63 


work;  but  it  has  been  brought  into  vogue  and  forced  upon  them  by  ignorant  reviewers,  unde- 
signing photographers,  and  the  malice  prepense  of  painters  who,  too  idle  or  unable  to  draw  upon 
the  wood,  have  deceived  unwitting  publishers  into  the  belief  that  they  were  inventing  “ a great 
invention.”  It  will  have  its  day,  and  then,  with  what  we  can  save  out  of  the  failure,  we  shall 
return  to  the  old  traditions,  not  renouncing  experiment,  but  also  not  abandoning  or  slighting 
the  experience  of  some  who  have  gone  before. 

I carefully  review  the  works  I have  had  before  me  for  this  history.  I can  find  nothing  so 
good  [and  let  it  be  remarked  that  it  was  as  fine  as  most  of  the  fine  work  of  to-day]  as  the 
Jacob's  Dream  engraved  by  Adams  nearly  half  a century  ago  (see  page  13).  It  is  better 
than  the  best  of  all  work  since  done,  better  than  the  best  so  much  extolled  at  present : because 
he  did  not  sacrifice  everything  to  fineness,  but  cared  first  for  the  essentials  of  good  drawing  and 
lines  with  meaning,  and  finished  only  after  laying  the  foundations. 

I would  not  part  from  my  readers  without  at  least  brief  explanation  of  the  course  I have 
pursued  in  the  foregoing  History,  — or  shall  I rather  call  it  Preliminary  Study  of  History  as 
part-preparation  for  some  completer  volume.  Concerning  the  earlier  men  I have  had  for  almost 
all  my  material  to  depend  upon  personal  recollections  of  men  often  strangers  to  me,  to  whose 
ready  courtesy  I here  acknowledge  my  great  obligations.  Sometimes  reports  so  collected  have 
not  agreed,  and  it  has  been  difficult  to  judge  between  conflicting  statements.  I may  not  always 
have  been  correct  in  my  judgment.  I am  hopeful,  however,  that  it  is  only  in  minor  and  quite 
unimportant  matters  that  I shall  be  found  astray.  There  may  be  errors,  too,  in  my  writing  of 
my  contemporaries:  some  wrongful  attribution  of  work;  omissions  also.  But  I may  conscien- 
tiously affirm  that  I have  rejected  no  information  of  any  worth  volunteered  to  me;  and  that  I 
have  sought  for  information  wherever  I had  the  slightest  hope  of  reaching  it,  — in  more  and  in 
stranger  quarters  than  I can  here  afford  space  to  give  account  of. 

For  my  critical  opinions  I can  truly  say  this:  they  have  had  no  personal  bias.  Very  often 
I have  chosen  the  subject  for  comment,  and  written  my  criticism,  before  knowing  who  was  the 
engraver.  It  was  a secondary  inquiry  — second  in  time  if  not  in  importance  — whose  name  I 
had  to  affix  to  it.  If  (I  have  already  pleaded  to  the  possibility)  my  remarks  have  sometimes 
seemed  harsh  or  out  of  tune,  I ask  of  the  engraver  who  may  read  them  to  forgive  any  cause 
he  may  find  for  momentary  wincing  or  disgust:  bearing  in  mind  his  own  regard  for  the  healthy 
progress  of  our  art,  for  which  I confess  myself  very  jealous.  I have  not  written  merely  to  sup- 
ply a dry  chronicle  of  the  doings  of  American  wood-engravers;  I have  written,  in  praise  or 
blame  as  seemed  just  to  me,  distinctly  from  a desire  to  help  the  advance  of  wood-engraving  in 
America.  I trust  the  true  lover  of  the  art  will  generously  pardon  any  short-comings  and  even 
some  offences  for  the  sake  of  our  common  object. 


CHAPTER  IX 


HE  reprint  of  my  History  as  a whole  gives  me  opportunity  for 
reviewing  what  I have  written,  and  of  atoning  for  certain  omis- 
sions in  the  same.  There  may  be  some  novelties  also  calling  for 
consideration.  To  two  men  especially,  owing  chiefly  to  the  neces- 
sity for  economizing  the  space  at  my  command,  I did  not  quite 
do  justice;  and  a third,  so  far  as  I could  ascertain,  had  not  at 
the  time  of  my  writing  put  in  an  appearance  in  his  own  name. 
The  first  two  are  Messrs.  Ivilburn  and  Davis,  of  whose  work  I am 
now  able  to  give  fairer  specimens  (from  recent  numbers  of  the 
American  Art  Review)  ; and  the  last  is  Mr.  Closson,  a younger 
aspirant  for  engraving  fame.  Of  his  work  and  Mr.  Davis’s  I shall  have  to  speak  at  length. 
Other  names  not  known  before  I may  here  take  note  of,  as  I gather  them  from  the  lists  of 
engravers  in  late  numbers  of  Harper  s Monthly  Magazine.  It  is  a new  and  fair  action  on  the 
part  of  the  publishers  to  give  this  credit  to  the  engravers  in  their  employ.  The  next  advance 
will  be  for  the  engraver’s  name  to  be  always  put  to  his  work.  He  cannot  readily  be  identified 
by  merely  reading  the  list  in  the  table  of  contents.  In  these  late  numbers,  good  work  by 
known  men  — Kruell,  Harley,  Smithwick  & French,  Hoskin,  King,  and  others  — I find  very 
creditably  companioned  by  the  work  of  Williams,  Tinkey,  ITellawell,  Brighton,  Winham,  Deis, 
Grimley,  Schelling,  Smart,  Delorme,  Tietze ; and  I may  yet  omit  names  worth  mentioning  in  a 
catalogue  of  engravers.  If  I do  not  particularize  any,  it  is  because  there  is  no  one  exception- 
ally characteristic.  All  are  on  a tolerably  even  level,  their  work  more  careful  and  finished  than 
we  were  in  the  habit  of  seeing  in  magazines,  — sometimes,  also,  not  always,  better  as  art.  The 
best  of  recent  cuts  in  Harper  are,  I think,  those  of  The  White  Mountains , from  Mr.  Gibson’s 
excellent  drawings.  Black  and  Tri-Pyramid  Mountains , by  Harley,  and  Franconia  Notch , by 
King,  both  in  this  August  number,  are  of  the  best,  if  not  the  best.  The  snow  on  Mr.  Tinkey’s 
neat  cut  of  Mount  Lafayette , in  the  same  number,  is  very  successfully  rendered:  none  the  better 
for  its  excessive  fineness,  notwithstanding  which,  however,  it  prints  admirably.  But  I need  not 
return  to  general  criticism  of  our  two  Magazines,  which  continue  the  even  tenor  of  their  way, 
neither  falling  off  nor  improving,  the  ne  plus  ultra  of  fineness  seeming  to  be  reached  in  both, 
and  no  great  new  departure  toward  Art  as  yet  to  be  recorded.  Yet  I would  call  attention  to 
one  cut  (certainly  not  meaning  that  it  is  the  only  one  worth  attention)  in  Scribner , as  a hint, 
and  I hope  a promise,  of  healthful  growth.  Following  some  very  careful  engravings  of  Marine 
Forms  (some  by  Leblanc,  other  names  I do  not  read),  there  is  one  of  the  Lobster  at  Home  in 
this  last  June  number,  in  which  I find  what  I am  so  long  vainly  looking  for,  — a line  drawn  by 
the  graver.  Would  the  reader  know  exactly  what  I mean,  let  him,  or  her,  look  to  the  Lobster 
Pot,  at  page  209,  engraved  by  F.  S.  King.  The  cut  is  as  fine  and  delicate  as  the  finest  that 
has  appeared  in  Scribner ; but  the  rock  and  water  are  really  distinct  substances,  and  the  lobsters 


FURTHER  CRITICISM 


Df.ngler,  Duveneck,  and  Farny,  in  their  Studio. 

Engraved  by  S.  S.  Kilburn.  — From  a Photograph. 

From  “ i he  American  Art  Review.” 

have  the  form  and  texture  of  lobsters.  Form,  color,  substance,  are  perfect:  to  fitness  of  line 
is  added  beauty  of  orderliness  and  intention,  which  mark  the  accomplished  engraver;  and  it  is 
at  once  vigorous  and  delicate.  The  fineness  here  is  not  without  its  charm.  It  were  a good 
lesson  for  one  desirous  of  learning  what  engraving  is  (which  I would  briefly  define  as  a process 
of  drawing  with  a graver)  to  compare,  say  rather  to  contrast,  this  with  other  cuts  in  the  same 
June  number; — the  Canners,  at  page  214,  or  the  Boiling-Room , page  216;  the  page  cut  of 
foan  of  Arc,  from  Lepage’s  picture;  the  Village  Spring , page  169;  the  scrap  of  “sculpture” 
at  page  161  ; or  the  more  important  bas-relief  at  page  230.  Surely  it  were  as  easy  to  repre- 
sent a stone  surface  as  a shell;  but  this  engraved  sculpture  is  not  stone.  Distances  might  have 
been  shown  at  pages  169,  214,  and  216,  as  well  as  in  the  Lobster  page.  Yet  in  the  cuts  on 
these  three  pages,  and  in  nearly  every  other  cut  in  the  number,  the  distant  objects  are  -on  the 
same  plane  as  the  near  ones.  It  is  the  naturally  concomitant  fault  of  the  imitation  of  photo- 
graphs. yoan  of  Arc  has  expression  and  color:  good,  so  far.  But  flesh,  drapery,  and  formless 
background  are  all  cut  with  the  same  poor,  combed-out,  inexpressive  line;  and  there  is  more 
artistic  power,  more  drawing  (I  hope  that  term  may  now  be  understood),  in  one  of  Mr.  King’s 
lobsters  than  in  yoan  of  Arc,  or  the  “bronze”  Farragut  either,  on  page  165.  I do  not  know 
by  whom  these  cuts  were  engraved.  T speak  of  them  only  as  engravings  happening  to  lie 
handy  for  my  remarks. 

Something  of  the  same  weakness  observable  in  all  these  cuts  I find  also  in  Mr.  Davis’s 
beautiful  cut  of  Eager  for  the  Fray.  I do  not  hesitate  to  call  it  beautiful:  a more  beautiful 
piece  of  hand  skill,  in  some  respects,  is  not  to  be  seen  in  these  pages;  but  it  lacks  the  drawing 


66 


DAVIS  — CLOSSON 


I admire  in  the  Lobsters.  Not  merely  cavilling,  nor  grudging  praise,  but  to  teach,  I point 
out  what  it  wants.  The  face  would  be  excellent,  if  the  lines  were  not  crossed  with  such  ugly 
rectangularity.  The  better  arrangement  of  line  on  the  boy’s  left  leg  and  foot,  both  admirably 
cut,  will  show  more  precisely  what  I mean.  The  body  has  the  same  fault  as  the  face,  and, 
what  is  worse,  is  formless.  Why  are  the  left  arm,  which  is  in  full  light,  and  both  hands,  darker 
than  the  shadowed  sides  of  the  rest  of  the  limbs  and  body?  Is  engraver  or  painter  answerable 
for  this?  In  the  trees  1 pick  out  as  a fault  the  indistinctness  and  want  of  precision.  Else  the 
line  of  the  trunks  is  good,  being  expressive,  having  the  look  of  bark.  The  dog,  too,  is  well 
rendered.  But  background  and  foreground  are  all  of  equal  vagueness;  and  the  boy’s  shirt 
might  be  — anything,  for  all  it  has  of  texture  or  substance  to  help  your  perception.  It  is  only 
a lump  of  unsubstantial  formlessness,  a mass  of  ugly  lining,  not  a fold  in  it,  nor  any  shape, 
drawing,  or  intention.  The  turned-up  portions  of  the  trousers  are  equally  formless.  All  this  is 
bad,  unartistic.  With  all  this  there  are  qualities  of  tone  and  delicacy,  and  even  determination 
of  line,  in  parts,  which  show  that  correct  drawing  alone  is  wanting  to  make  the  whole  a fine 
work  of  art.  Lacking  form,  it  seems  to  me  to  lack  everything,  in  spite  of  all  its  dexterous  and 
dainty  manipulation.  If,  however,  as  seems  to  be  contended  by  many,  accuracy  of  drawing  is 
not  needful,  the  mere  pleasant  first  impression  all  that  is  required  in  an  engraving,  then  this  cut 
is  perfect.  Unsatisfactory  to  the  critic,  it  may  please  and  satisfy  the  easier  public. 

I am  glad  to  be  able  to  give  unbated  praise  to  Mr.  Closson’s  excellent  rendering  of  Mr. 
George  Fuller’s  lovely  picture  of  Winifred  Dysart.  Here  even  the  extreme  fineness  is  of  value. 
I know  not  how  else  the  engraver  could  have  done  justice  to  the  delicate  subtlety  of  the 
picture.  Though  I have  spoken  severely  of  indiscriminate  fineness,  I do  not  the  less  recognize 
its  occasional  and  certain  value.  My  objection  has  been  to  the  preference  given  to  mere  fine- 
ness over  power  and  expression ; or,  shall  I say,  to  its  use  for  the  sake  of  hiding  feebleness 
or  meaninglessness  of  line.  Fineness  (I  cannot  too  often  or  too  emphatically  insist)  is  not 
necessarily  refinement,  and  except  as  refinement  has  no  sort  of  value  whatever.  To  represent 
by  ten  lines  what  could  be  better  done,  or  only  as  well  done,  by  five,  is  waste  of  labor  and 
ridiculous  excess,  — is  not  art,  however  triumphant  as  mechanism.  There  can  be  no  possible 
correct  judgment  of  engraving,  nor  indeed  of  painting  or  sculpture,  without  the  thorough  recog- 
nition of  this  distinction.  As  I have  written  elsewhere,  (but  the  matter  will  bear  much  repeti- 
tion,) “It  is  a mistake  to  suppose  that  fineness  (closeness  and  littleness  of  line)  and  refinement 
(finish)  are  anything  like  synonymous  terms.  There  is  such  a thing  as  propriety,  — suitability 
not  only  to  size,  but  to  subject,  in  the  treatment  of  an  engraving.  A work  may  be  bold  even 
to  the  verge  of  what  is  called  coarseness,  yet  quite  fine  enough  for  the  purpose,  — by  which  I 
do  not  at  all  mean  the  purpose  of  the  publisher.  Also  it  may  be  finished  and  refined,  however 
bold : in  which  case  to  call  if  coarse  simply  because  the  lines  may  be  large  and  wide  apart 
would  be  only  misuse  of  words.”  Vedder’s  Sleeping  Girl  is  not  less  finished  than  the  portrait 
of  Mr.  Chase  on  page  68;  but  I would  have  thought  myself  foolishly  wasting  time  had  I 
engraved  it  with  the  closeness  of  line  appropriate  to  that. 

Truly  may  fineness  be  out  of  character  with  the  subject.  “Take  some  landscape  strong  in 
opposition  of  color,  — a wild,  tempestuous  scene,  large  and  vigorous  in  treatment.  The  painter 
has  flung  his  paint  upon  it,  left  the  coarse  marks  of  his  half-pound  brush  and  the  mighty  sweep 
of  his  trowel.  He  cares  not  for  that,  — need  not  care;  seen  at  a proper  distance  the  effect  is 
what  he  desired.  What  would  you  say  to  the  engraver  who  should  so  far  disregard  the  bold 
carelessness  characteristic  of  the  painting  as  to  give  you  in  niggling  minuteness  every  brush  and 
trowel  mark,  in  order  that,  or  so  that,  you  may  forget  the  real  worth  of  the  picture,  despite  the 
painter’s  breadth  and  vigor  and  absolute  disdain  or  dislike  of  finish,  in  your  admiration  for  the 
engraver’s  most  delicate  and  neatest  handling?  ‘ See  how  grandly  broad  the  rendering  of  that 
cloud!’  (It  is  perhaps  the  painter  talking  to  himself;  or  is  it  the  accomplished  literary  critic 
discoursing  learnedly  on  matters  of  unknown  art  to  an  admiring  crowd?)  ‘A  momentary 


EAGER  FOR  THE  FRAY. 

ENGRAVED  BY  J.  P.  DAVIS,  AFTER  WALTER  SHIRLAW. 


1 THH  AMI.KIi  AN  AKT  KI.VII  AN 


WINIFRED  DYSART. 


ENGRAVED  BY  YVM.  B.  CLOSSON 


.FTER  GEORGE  EG  LEE! 


I I Hi.  AM 


«■  . 


MAGDALEN. 

ENGRAVED*  BY  WM.  B.  GLOSSON,  AFTER  DR.  R1MMER. 

"THli  AMUKICAN  AK  I KUVIBW." 


* 


I'KUM 


i . 1 


DRAWN  AND  ENGRAVED  BY  W.  J.  LINTON,  AFTER  E.  VEDDER. 


THE  MEANING  OF  “FINE” 


67 


sketch!  instantaneous  as  a photograph!  exceedingly  effective!  No,  it  could  not  be  improved 
by  any  additional  care  in  modelling,  or  by  any  gradations  of  shade  or  color.  Only  view  it  from 
such  right  distance  that  you  are  not  disturbed  by  the  carelessness  of  the  manipulation.’  Says 
the  engraver,  or  his  work  for  him:  ‘Never  mind  the  cloud  or  anything  else  of  the  picture! 
See  how  admirably  I have  imitated  the  crossing  of  the  brush-strokes ! Notice  the  shadows  of 
the  blobs  of  color  left  where  the  palette-knife  laid  it  on  ! You  can  tell  at  a glance  which  is 
brush-done  and  which  is  knife  or  trowel  work.’  Is  that  the  purpose  of  engraving?  Labor,  even 
skilled  labor,  can  be  ill-bestowed.  And  if,  after  all  this  trouble  about  brush-marks,  you  have 
lost  what  drawing  there  was  in  the  picture,  missed  the  very  spirit  and  grandeur  of  the  land- 
scape, while  busied  with  those  little  sprigs  of  mint  and  anise  in  the  corner,  how  shall  your 
engraving  be  called  fine , in  any  artistic  sense,  though  it  needs  a microscope  to  enable  me  to 
count  the  lines?  What  wonderful  eyes,  what  dexterity  of  hand,  must  have  been  in  requisition! 
But,  after  all,  it  is  not  a fine  engraving.  Fine  as  an  artist’s  word  is  not  the  same  as  in  the 
proverb  of  the  feathers.  Fine  feathers  may  make  fine  birds,  but  fine  lines  only  will  not  make  a 
fine  engraving.  The  one  is  the  French  fine,  thin,  crafty,  not  exactly  honest:  from  which  are 
many  derivatives,  such  as  finasser,  to  use  mean  ways;  finasseur,  a sharper;  finasserie,  petty 
trick,  poor  artifice ; finesse,  cunning,  etc.  Quite  other  is  the  masculine  fin,  the  essential ; from 
which  we  get  finir,  to  finish;  and  finisseur,  a finisher  or  perfectioner.  And  the  first  fine  is  the 
very  opposite  of  the  old  Roman  finis,  the  crowning  of  the  work.  The  artist  does  care  for 
finish,  that  is,  for  the  perfectness  of  his  work ; he  is  below  the  real  artist,  and  will  reach  no 
greatness,  whenever  he  can  be  content  with  the  unfinished.  But  the  word  fine,  the  proper 
adjective  for  a great  work,  was  taken,  perhaps  unaware,  by  poor  engravers,  careful  mechanics 
without  capacity  for  art,  as  a cover  for  their  deficiencies ; and,  accepted  by  ignorant  connoisseurs, 
now  passes  current,  for  the  beguilement  of  trusting  publishers  and  an  easily  bewildered  public. 
So  trick  is  admired  instead  of  honest  art  workmanship. 

“ An  engraving  is  fine,  meaning  good,  in  so  far  as  art,  as  distinguished  from  mere  mechani- 
cal dexterity,  has  been  employed  upon  it,  is  visible  in  the  result:  visible,  I would  say  further, 
even  to  the  uneducated,  if  not  already  vitiated  by  the  words  of  misleading  critics.  The  art  of 
an  engraving  is  discoverable,  even  by  the  uninitiated,  in  the  intention  of  the  lines.  You  may 
not  have  an  artist’s  quickness  of  perception,  nor  his  maturer  judgment;  but  if  you  see  an 
engraving,  of  which  the  parts,  any  of  them  taken  separately,  are  unintelligible,  you.  will  rightly 
suppose  that  the  engraver  did  not  know  what  he  was  doing,  or  how  to  do  it.  Do  not  believe 
that  the  work  is  good  for  anything,  though  you  read  the  most  impartial  and  unbought  recom- 
mendations of  many  a newspaper ! Art  is  a designing  power.  If  you  can  find  no  proof  of 
that,  reject  the  work  as  bad  ! ” 

I am  not  losing  sight  of  Mr.  Closson’s  engraving,  for  my  words  have  reference  to  that.  I 
admire  his  work,  not  because  it  is  fine  (in  the  sense  of  close  and  minute  and  many-lined),  but 
because  such  fineness  (minuteness)  was  necessary  for  his  subject,  and  because,  close  and  deli- 
cate as  his  lines  are,  he  has  not  lost  determination  and  force ; because  I can  see  throughout 
his  graver-work  intention  and  feeling,  and  that  the  lines  stand  closely  for  the  sake  of  expression, 
are  not  merely  huddled  together  in  ignorance  of  handling.  He  has  sacrificed  nothing  of  value 
in  caring  for  the  exquisite  finish  of  his  work.  Wherefore  it  is  a work  of  art.  I can  hardly  give 
the  same  praise  to  his  Magdalen,  at  best  a good  imitation  of  a phototype,  — such  imitation  a 
very  doubtful  sort  of  success.  Some  excuse  I can  find  for  the  attempt  in  a desire  to  produce 
as  nearly  as  possible  a fac-simile  of  the  original  drawing.  I he  phototype  process  would  have 
done  that  better.  I think  that  my  friend  Dr.  Rimmcr,  with  his  clear  judgment  of  the  essentials 
of  Art,  would  not  have  cared  for  this,  would  have  been  well  content,  perhaps  more  pleased,  to 
have  seen  a broader  treatment.  But  I will  not  too  much  blame  what  may  have  been  only  the 
weakness  of  a conscientious  timidity.  Mr.  Closson’s  evident  earnestness  in  his  work  will  in  due 
time  teach  him  how  to  dare  and,  daring,  to  excel. 


68 


JUENGLING  AND  KRUELL 


Two  recent  clever  and 
important  works  by  Mr. 
Juengling — The  Profes- 
sor, after  a picture  by 
Mr.  Duveneck,  and  The 
Old  Peasant  and  las 
Daughter , a copy  from 
the  German  painter,  Leibl 
(American  Art  Re- 
view) — challenge  con- 
sideration. Of  the  Pro- 
fessor I frankly  confess 
that  the  first  sight  was 
very  pleasant  to  me,  so 
good  is  the  general  effect. 
Further  examination  did 
not  increase  my  pleasure. 
Yet  I allow  what  seems 
to  me  a faithful  and  very 
close  imitation  of  the 
original.  Even  the  tex- 
ture of  the  painting  ap- 
pears to  be  admirably 
rendered.  The  expres- 
sion and  color  I should 
believe  to  be  as  true. 
Is  not  that  enough?  Not 
quite.  That  said,  I have 
to  say  further,  that  the 
truth  and  fidelity  are  of 
the  Chinese  sort,  not  dis- 
paraging the  mechanical 


skill  of  the 
But  it  is  mechanical,  and 
not  artistic.  I must  con- 
tend that,  whatever  re- 
spect may  be  due  to  a 
painting,  the 
business  in 
flesh  is  to  make  it  like 
flesh,  and  not  like  only 

paint;  always  premising  that  the  painter,  notwithstanding  all  paintiness,  did  intend  to  give  an 
appearance  of  flesh.  Is  it  too  much  here  to  suppose  that  Mr.  Duveneck  was  not  altogether 
careless  of  that,  and  possibly  did  intend,  if  not  achieve,  something  of  the  sort?  Would  it  then 
have  been  too  great  a liberty  in  the  engraver  to  have  carried  out  such  intention,  and  given  us 
flesh,  instead  of  only  a painted  board ? Is  there  any  hair  on  the  Professor  s head,  or  has  some 
lad  amused  himself  with  cutting  notches  in  the  block?  Two  terrible  cuts  over  the  Pro  es  ^ 
right  ear,  and  an  awful  gash,  almost  severing  the  left  ear  from  his  cheek,  may  be  so  done  in 
the  painting,  but  have  an  ugly  appearance  in  the  engraving.  Has  he  lost  a great  portion  o 
his  beard  and  moustache,  or  does  it  only  happen  that,  upper  lip,  shadow  of  nose,  shadowed 


engraver. 


William  M.  Chase. 

Engraved  by  G.  Kruell.  — From  a Photograph  by  Kurtz. 

From  “The  American  Art  Review.” 


engraver  s 
rendering 


THE  NEW  SCHOOL  — PRIZE  ENGRAVINGS 


69 


cheek,  eye,  hair,  coat,  and  background,  being  all  of  the  same  wooden  texture,  there  was  no 
occasion  by  any  difference  of  line  to  distinguish  one  from  another?  There  is  no  drawing  in 
any.  And  notice  how  awkward  and  inharmonious  are  the  lines  of  the  face  in  the  lighter  parts. 
Except  the  ear,  which  is  not  an  ear  at  all,  and  the  patched  eyebrows,  the  modelling  here  is 
generally  very  good,  and  the  effect,  I repeat,  is  capital.  Was  the  work  too  fine  to  add  some 
beauty  of  line?  Compare  it  with  the  portrait  by  Mr.  Kruell,  here  opposite  to  it.  The  Ivruell 
head  is  smaller,  and  the  work  is  minute ; but  the  lines  are  pleasant,  and  in  accordance  with 
the  forms  they  represent,  helping  the  representation,  which  Mr.  Juengling’s  lines  do  not.  One 
would  think  that  he  has  no  sense  of  fitness  of  line,  no  perception  whatever  of  lineal  beauty,  or 
that  some  eccentricity  makes  him  averse  to  any  lines  that  are  sweet  and  graceful.  The  one 
head  is  the  work  of  an  artist;  the  other,  perhaps  more  clever,  only  shows  a remarkably  skilful 
mechanic.  Throughout  the  one  work  there  is  a feeling  of  beauty  and  fitness,  of  which  I can- 
not find  a trace  in  the  other.  I like  not  to  draw  such  comparisons;  but  better  not  to  criticise 
at  all  than  to  shirk  the  truth.  The  all-important  distinction  I have  noted  may  be  yet  further 
observed,  if  my  reader  will  look  back  to  Mr.  Johnson’s  Mozart , at  page  44,  and  to  Mr.  Kruell’s 
Fletcher  Harper , on  the  opposite  page  to  that. 

The  Old  Peasant  and  his  Daughter , for  all  its  elaboration,  equally  dissatisfies  me.  Carefully 
elaborated  it  certainly  is;  the  color  and  general  effect  of  the  picture  are,  I have  no  doubt,  well 
kept,  the  expression  of  the  faces  also.  But  again  I have  to  ask:  May  not  even  peasant’s 

hands  and  faces  deserve  as  accurate  definition  as  — the  claws  of  those  kingly  lobsters  of  which 
I lately  spoke?  Is  that  a hand  behind  the  girl?  Compare,  again,  with  Mr.  Kruell’s ! Is  it 
flesh,  that  scabbiness  on  the  back  of  the  hand  which  rests  upon  the  chair?  Shall  glass,  cloth, 
and  flesh,  have  no  variety  of  line  to  mark  their  difference  of  substance?  Mr.  Juengling  lacks 
not  command  of  his  graver:  why  does  he  allow  it  to  run  so  wildly  astray?  Or,  again,  is  he 
the  victim  of  a false  theory,  — that  fidelity  to  the  painter  may  supersede  all  faithfulness  to  Art 
and  truth?  I ask  these  questions,  not  captiously,  but  necessarily,  lest  I,  too,  fail  to  prefer  a 
critic’s  duty  — of  outspoken  censure,  when  censure  seems  required. 

Here,  also,  lies  the  whole  question  between  myself  and  what  has  been  called  the  New  School: 
yet  not  new,  for  the  same  faults  have  been  long  existent,  though  never  so  ostentatiously 
exposed.  I have  been  reproached  with  jealousy  of  a new  departure.  There  is  little  novelty 
except  in  the  defence  and  attempted  justification  of  the  departure,  — the  old  departure  from 
artistic  conscientiousness,  for  the  sake  of  a temporary  popularity.  And  for  that  fidelity  to  the 
painter  which,  in  season  and  out  of  season,  is  so  much  insisted  on,  I may  say  this:  that  I have 
a right  to  the  credit  of  first  insisting  on  attention  to  the  painter’s  or  draughtsman’s  individuality, 
and  that  in  work  with  my  name  to  it  of  more  than  thirty  years  ago  will  be  found  the  first 
endeavors  in  that  direction.  But  the  painter  is  not  all.  The  engraver  should  be  also  an  artist, 
not  less  than  a translator,  something  more  than  a copying  machine.  And  although  lie  has  no 
right  to  thrust  himself,  or  say  his  manner,  in  the  place  of  the  painter’s,  yet  the  mere  eftace- 
ment  of  all  individuality  in  him  will  not  necessarily  enable  him  as  an  accomplished  copyist. 

One  thing  I notice  in  this  new  acquirement  of  self-abnegation  (the  Chinese  method,  as  1 
must  continue  to  call  it)  : that  is,  the  ease  with  which  it  degenerates  into  simplest  mannerism, 
so  that  all  men’s  work  becomes  alike  unmanly,  and  engraving  after  the  new  pattern  may  almost 
be  taught  in  the  traditional  “six  lessons.”  Am  I exaggerating?  Let  Scribner's  Magazine  bear 
witness  for  me.  Here  before  me  is  the  number  for  April  of  the  present  year,  with  its  trum- 
peted prize  engravings:  the  first  by  a boy,  aged  sixteen  years,  whose  time  of  practice  had  been 
only  two  years;  the  second,  after  six  months’  practice;  the  third,  after  fourteen  months.  1 he 
second  of  these  prize  engravings  is  too  weak  to  be  worth  notice;  but  the  first  and  third  may 
rank  fairly  with  the  average  cuts  in  the  Magazine.  There  is  the  same  minuteness  and  infirmity 
of  line  as  in  the  usual  work  of  the  “new”  photographic  school,  whose  indistinct  and  indis- 
tinguishable mannerism  is  most  unhappily  described  as  remarkable  for  “ a variety  id  refined, 


70 


DRY  AND  DAMP  PRINTING 


rich,  unhackneyed  styles,  never  before  seen  in  the  history  of  the  art.”  Is  that  art  which  can  be 
so  readily  mastered,  which  can  be  so  easily  learned  by  boys  and  the  rawest  experimenters? 
The  question  answers  itself.  I accept  gratefully  the  involuntary  confession  that  this  experiment 
“ to  a notable  extent  has  revealed  and  confirmed  the  characteristics  of  the  new  school  type.” 
And  I can  go  further  in  confirmation.  1 have  under  my  eyes  at  this  writing  the  second  attempt 
at  engraving  of  an  entirely  unartistic  but  enthusiastic  amateur.  A thoughtful,  patient,  handy 
man,  he  has  wonderfully  done  his  cutting.  It  is  fine,  clean,  line  for  line  to  the  photograph  on 
the  wood;  but  it  is  pure  mechanism,  there  is  not  a touch  of  art  in  it.  With  this  ' before  me, 
indorsing  the  Scribner  prize  experience,  I feel  confirmed  in  my  judgment,  — in  which  perhaps 
some  few  engravers  will  bear  me  out,  — that  “the  three  commanding  characteristics  of  wood- 
engraving in  the  United  States  at  the  present  time”  are  not , as  asserted  in  Scribner  (April, 
1 88 1 ) , either  “originality,”  or  “individuality  and  variety  of  style,”  or  “faithfulness  in  the  repro- 
duction of  a wide  range  of  subjects  by  diverse  methods.”  On  the  contrary,  I affirm  that,  owing 
chiefly  to  the  servile  following  of  photographs,  individuality  has  been  weakened,  faithfulness 
become  Chinese,  and  the  “art”  more  monotonous  than  ever.  Variety  of  subject  is  not  the 
same  thing  as  variety  of  method.  The  only  originality  I find,  in  a method  borrowed  from 
England  (where  the  same  viciousness  was  in  vogue  before  Scribner  began),  consists  in  adding 
to  the  old  utter  neglect  of  the  necessary  fitness  of  line  to  the  object  it  would  represent  a reck- 
less and  defiant,  I will  not  call  it  daring,  disregard  of  all  lineal  beauty  and  orderliness,  — a 
departure  to  be  admired  only  so  far  as  we  may  admire  the  “art”  of  those  painters  who  pride 
themselves  on  cheap  slovenliness  and  impressive  trowelling.  There  is  nothing  worth  calling 
originality  in  this,  nor  anything  of  individuality  in  the  wide  range  of  feeblenesses  in  imitation  of 
“ diverse  methods.”  One  method  cannot  to  any  good  purpose  imitate  another.  Wood-engraving 
is  not  better  for  looking  like  steel  or  crayon.  I am  not  defending  an  old  “ rut,”  because  I 
praise  not  the  new  “ departure.”  These  experiments,  valueless  in  themselves,  I have  already 
said,  may  yet  have  use.  They  compel  some  nicety  of  hand,  and  train,  if  they  do  not  educate, 
the  eyes;  and  this  will  some  day  be  turned  to  better  account,  — nay,  is  of  advantage  already 
to  men  not  enslaved  to  manner,  — such  men  as  Messrs.  Kruell,  King,  and  Closson.  I name  them 
because  in  this  present  writing  I have  had  occasion  to  notice  their  work. 

Minuteness  of  work  also  has  compelled  renewed  attention  to  printing.  For  all  which,  while  in 
some  measure  thankful,  I am  again  at  issue  with  the  editor  of  Scribner  in  his  advocacy  of  dry 
paper.  Dry  paper,  certainly,  if  you  cannot  get  your  paper  properly  damped,  — not  else.  This  dry 
paper,  also,  is  no  Scribner  novelty.  Indeed,  the  Magazine  is  well  printed  (I  did  not  think  that 
on  dry  paper  such  a result  could  be  obtained),  but  that  does  not  prove  the  superiority  of  the 
process.  Dry  printing  suits  the  Magazine,  its  paper,  and  its  cuts ; but  I could  show  better 
printing  of  old  time,  before  the  adulteration  of  tinted  papers  rendered  it  inexpedient  to  damp 
them,  wherefore  for  publishers’  economical  reasons  the  old  good  plan  had  to  be  abandoned. 
Dry  paper  also  suited  the  vulgar  “ taste  ” of  the  French  printer,  who  delights  in  a disgustingly 
high  polish  upon  his  paper,  with  the  blacks  in  full  glare.  Books  from  the  “ Chiswick  Press,” 
printed  always  on  damp  paper,  show  a finer  result,  and  from  finer  engravings,  than  anything  of 
to-day.  I could  point  even  to  some  early  printing  of  the  Illustrated  London  Neivs,  not  yet 
beaten,  if  matched,  by  the  finest  specimens  of  magazine  or  book  work  upon  this  side. 

To  sum  up  my  criticisms  in  few  words,  removed  from  personality.  I have  not  objected  to 
any  novelty  merely  because  new.  An  experimenter  myself,  my  life  through,  I do.  not  lean  to 
too  much  respect  for  conventions  or  established  systems.  But  I have  learned,  even  while 
experimenting,  that  it  is  not  given  to  any  one,  even  in  engraving  or  printing,  to  make  such 
new  discoveries  as  shall  warrant  him  in  despising  all  the  knowledge  of  the  past.  Our  young 
men  may  be  wiser  than  their  elders,  and  yet  we  will  not  quite  believe  that  our  fathers  were  all 
fools.  Change,  I can  allow,  was  needed  from  the  mere  conventional  methods  which  are  abun- 
dantly represented  in  these  pages.  But  the  change  that  was  needed  was  a return  to  the  old 


THE  OLD  PEASANT  AND  HIS  DAUGHTER. 

ENGRAVED  BY  F.  JUENGLING,  AFTER  W.  LE1BL 


FROM  ''THE  AMERICAN  ART  RliVIE’ 


THE  PROFESSOR. 


ENGRAVED  BY 


F.  JUENGLING,  AFTER 


DUVENECK. 


FROM 


THE  AMERICAN  ART  REVIEW." 


THE  GOD  OF  WINE. 

DRAWN  AND  ENGRAVED  BY  W.  J.  LINTON,  AFTER  F.  BARTH. 

FROM  APPLETON'S  " ART  JOURNAL.” 


THE  RIVER  GOD. 


DRAWN  AND  ENGRAVED  BY  W.  J.  LINTON,  AFTER  B.  KNUEFFER. 


FROM  APPLETON’S  "ART  JOURNAL. 


PHOTOGRAPHY  — CONCLUSION 


7i 


practice  of  Anderson  and  Bewick;  not  new  methods  of  mechanism,  but  such  attention  to  draw- 
ing (with  the  graver)  as  may  be  seen  in  their  work,  and  also  in  the  work  of  Adams.  This  is 
no  new  preaching  on  my  part.  If  I take  any  pride  to  myself  as  an  engraver,  it  is  not  so  much 
for  my  work,  my  many  failures  and  deficiency  in  which  (mainly  owing  to  that  very  want  of 
drawing)  I am  well  able  to  perceive,  but  that  I have  given  what  energy  and  influence  I had  in 
trying  to  bring  back  the  white  line  of  Bewick,  and  in  insisting  on  adaptation  of  line  to  the 
object,  bearing  also  in  mind  the  respect  due  to  the  subject  in  hand.  The  engravings  I give  of 
my  own,  here  and  at  page  43,  are  given  for  the  sake  of  further  explaining  what  I mean  by 
this.  They  will  also  show  that  I cannot  object  to  cross-lining.  I advocate  it  wherever  it  can 
be  used  to  advantage  and  without  discordance  of  line.  Indeed,  up  to  a very  recent  period,  I 
have  been  the  only  user  of  it  to  any  extent.  For  care  of  the  very  manner  of  a painter,  so  far 
as  may  be  done  without  disrespect  to  the  first  principles  of  art,  it  may  be  enough  to  say  that 
the  English  water-color  painters,  whose  drawings  on  wood  set  the  example  of  this  distinctness 
of  style,  were  first  employed  by  me,  with  that  one  object  in  view.  If  I object  to  photography 
on  wood,  it  is  because  photographs  even  of  drawings  are  not  so  good  as  the  drawings  them- 
selves ; because,  also,  photographs  are  never  true.  That  they  are  better  than  bad  drawings  says 
nothing  for  them.  I object  to  them  as  indefinite  and  misleading.  I object  to  their  universal 
use  (I  would  use  them  in  exceptional  cases)  because  they  have  a tendency  to  make  the  engraver 
forget  form,  and  attend  only  to  color ; and  I cannot  too  often  repeat  that  the  first  essential  in 
engraving,  as  in  drawing,  is  form,  and  not  color.  I dislike  the  minuteness  of  work  encouraged, 
almost  necessitated,  by  photographs,  because  it  is  a hindrance  to  that  expressiveness  of  line 
which  is  assuredly  one  of  the  charms  of  good  engraving:  not  only  valuable  in  itself,  but  also  as 
an  exercise,  teaching  the  engraver  to  draw  with  his  graver.  And  I altogether  condemn  the  child- 
ish care  for  expressing  unessentials,  while  neglectful  of  the  essential.  I condemn  all  tricks  and 
pretences,  even  in  engraving.  An  engraver  should  be  an  artist;  and  he  is  false  to  his  calling 
when  he  sets  mechanical  skill  above  art,  — unworthy  of  his  name  if  he  confounds  the  two.  On 
these  points  the  common  understanding  of  engravers,  of  some  (I  know)  whom  I have  most 
unsparingly  criticised,  agrees  with  me.  I have  yet  met  with  no  engraver  impugning  the  broad 

truth  of  my  position,  nor  a single  artist  (setting  aside  minor  differences  of  opinion)  denying  the 

general  correctness  of  my  views.  Choice  of  words  and  tone  in  which  those  views  have  been 
put  forth,  — these  are  mine  alone.  Here  I would  only  say,  I have  intended  no  offence.  If 
nothing  has  been  extenuate,  nothing  has  been  set  down  in  malice ; if  I have  not  always  exhib- 
ited a tender  heart,  at  least  I have  been  conscientious.  My  History,  I dare  to  think,  will  stand 
as  a fair  and  trustworthy,  if  insufficient,  record  of  Wood-Engraving  in  this  America;  and  what 
comes  only  as  opinion  may  not  be  without  some  benefit  to  my  younger  brothers  in  the  art. 

Yet  some  few  last  words,  not  of  complaining  or  despondency,  rather  of  praise  and  encour- 
agement. Time  was  when  I despaired  of  any  future  for  wood-engraving.  It  seemed  to  be  one 

of  the  lost  arts.  To  the  men  of  the  “ New  School,”  whom  I have  not  feared  to  offend  (I  call 

no  man  artist  who  is  afraid  to  learn,  and  count  him  among  my  best  friends  who  tells  me  of 
my  faults),  and  to  some  of  those  for  whom  I have  not  been  sparing  of  blame,  I look  thankfully 
and  with  hope.  Notwithstanding  all  my  censures,  the  revival  of  wood-engraving  is  in  their 
hands.  They  will  outgrow  their  mistakes.  If  I have  helped  them  toward  that,  I am  content. 
Through  all  mistakes  and  the  worst  follies  of  experiment,  Art  still  lives  and  must  progress.  1' or 
hand  skilfulness  alone,  new  processes  will  supersede  that.  Let  the  engraver,  then,  doubt  nothing 
so  much  as  praise  for  mere  mechanical  success.  Let  him  study,  even  in  his  most  obedient 
work,  to  be  a true  and  uncompromising  artist.  True  to  Art,  which  is  truthful  beauty;  true  to 
himself,  for  conscience’  sake;  and  yet  true  (in  which  last  he  will  not  fail  under  the  higher 
limitations)  to  the  author  whom  he  has  to  translate.  Not  mechanical  excellence,  but  thorough- 
ness in  art,  will  furnish  material  for  a new  History  of  Wood-Engraving  in  America. 


BLANKS  FOR  MOUNTING  PROOFS 


ILLUSTRATIVE  OF 

THE  HISTORY 

OF 

WOOD  ENGRAVING  IN  AMERICA. 


DIRECTIONS.— PREPARE  A STIFF  MUCILAGE  BY  DISSOLVING  GUM  . 
ARABIC  IN  WATER.  TOUCH  THE  EDGES  OF  PROOF  VERY  LIGHTLY 
AND  PRESS  FIRMLY  UPON  THE  BLANK.  TOO  MUCH  MUCILAGE  WILL 
CAUSE  THE  PAPER  TO  WRINKLE. 


• ? 


- 


II 


r 


- 


. 

■ 

' 

- 


. 


% 


